Most American Receive More from the Government Than They Pay in Taxes
More than half of Americans receive more money in various types of government transfer payments (Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps and Social Security) than they pay in federal taxes. The Congressional Budget Office reports that only the top 40% income earners in the US pay more in taxes than they receive in government transfers. Ludwig von Mises once noted that once we get to the point that a majority of the voting population receives more in benefits than it pays in taxes, then voters will demand more and more wealth be transferred to them through government programs. It will then become politically necessary to extract larger and larger amounts of wealth from a minority in order to subsidize the majority.
More than half of Americans receive more money in various types of government transfer payments (Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, Social Security) than they pay in federal taxes.
According to a report released this year by the Congressional Budget Office, only those in the top forty-percent income brackets in the United States pay more in taxes than they receive in government transfers.
Not surprisingly, the lowest income brackets receive far more in transfers than they pay in taxes:
In the lowest quintile (on-fifth or 20% of the total), households pay only $400 in taxes (as of 2014, the most recent data available) while receiving more than $16,000 in various types of tax-funded transfer payments.
Senator Heitkamp’s Staff Reveal Her Plan Reel-In Moderate Voters, and then Become “Super Liberal” After She Wins the Election
Project Veritas released undercover video from Senator Heidi Heitkamp’s (D-ND) campaign and staff exposing bait and switch politics to court moderate voters. Featured in the report is Senator Heitkamp’s Digital Director, Jesse Overton, who says that Senator Heitkamp will be “super liberal” should she be re-elected. Staffers from Senator Heitkamp’s Fargo, North Dakota campaign office revealed they make Senator Heitkamp’s campaign appear more moderate than it really is to the press and voters.
Running Away from Obama: Campaign Staff hides Obama Merch from Press, “doesn’t poll well here”
Heitkamp Digital Director: “she’d probably be bolder” Once Re-Elected
Heitkamp Campaign Deliberately Vague on Support for Border Wall
Senate Staff Assistant: “If the country moved further to the left, [Heitkamp] would move to the left.”
Campaign Organizer: Pressure Trump with Impeachment if “we get the Senate back”
This is a breaking news story. Refresh the page for updates.
(Washington DC) Project Veritas Action Fund has released undercover video from incumbent Senator Heidi Heitkamp’s campaign and Senate staff exposing bait and switch politics to court moderate voters. This is the fifth undercover video report Project Veritas has released in a series revealing secrets and lies from political campaigns in 2018.
Said James O’Keefe, founder and president of Project Veritas Action:
“As we’ve seen from our undercover reports this October, politicians, will lie, obfuscate and hide their real politics to win a few votes. Senator Heidi Heitkamp from North Dakota is no exception.”
Heitkamp Will Be “Super Liberal” Once Re-Elected
Featured in the report is Senator Heitkamp’s Digital Director, Jesse Overton, who says that Senator Heitkamp will be “super liberal” should she be re-elected:
OVERTON: “It’s an election year for her. She’s being careful about pissing people off, and … said basically like, after the election, if and when she gets re-elected, she’s going to be super liberal.”
Overton alleges that during the campaign, Senator Heitkamp plays politics “safe,” but if she wins a third term “she’d probably be a little more bolder about it.”
Also in the report are staffers from Senator Heitkamp’s Fargo, North Dakota campaign office, including Hallie Skripak-Gordon and Lauren Dronen, who reveal they make Senator Heitkamp’s campaign appear more moderate than it really is to the press and voters.
Senator Calls for Investigation of Julie Swetnick and Her Attorney Who Claimed Brett Kavanaugh Attended Gang-Rape Parties in the 1980s
Senator Chuck Grassley has made a referral for a criminal investigation against attorney Michael Avenatti and his client Julie Swetnick, who made the outrageous claim, in a sworn statement, that Judge Brett Kavanaugh engaged in gang rape numerous times in the 1980s. She later walked back some of her claims in a TV interview that she made under oath. She faces charges of potential conspiracy to provide materially false statements to Congress and obstruct a congressional committee investigation, three separate crimes, during Kavanaugh’s nomination process to the Supreme Court of the United States. Grassley said that ignoring this behavior will just invite more of it in the future.
Attorney Michael Avenatti and his client Julie Swetnick have been referred to the Justice Department for criminal investigation for a “potential conspiracy to provide materially false statements to Congress and obstruct a congressional committee investigation, three separate crimes, in the course of considering Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States,” according to a statement released by the Judiciary Committee.
While the Committee was in the middle of its extensive investigation of the late-breaking sexual-assault allegations made by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh, Avenatti publicized his client’s allegations of drug- and alcohol-fueled gang rapes in the 1980s. The obvious, subsequent contradictions along with the suspicious timing of the allegations necessitate a criminal investigation by the Justice Department.
“When a well-meaning citizen comes forward with information relevant to the committee’s work, I take it seriously. It takes courage to come forward, especially with allegations of sexual misconduct or personal trauma. I’m grateful for those who find that courage,” Grassley said. “But in the heat of partisan moments, some do try to knowingly mislead the committee. That’s unfair to my colleagues, the nominees and others providing information who are seeking the truth. It stifles our ability to work on legitimate lines of inquiry. It also wastes time and resources for destructive reasons. Thankfully, the law prohibits such false statements to Congress and obstruction of congressional committee investigations. For the law to work, we can’t just brush aside potential violations. I don’t take lightly making a referral of this nature, but ignoring this behavior will just invite more of it in the future.”
Grassley referred Swetnick and Avenatti for investigation in a letter sent today to the Attorney General of the United States and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The letter notes potential violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 1001 and 1505, which respectively define the federal criminal offenses of conspiracy, false statements and obstruction of Congress. The referral seeks further investigation only, and is not intended to be an allegation of a crime. –Senate Judiciary Committee
The referral has an entire section entitled: “issues with Mr. Avenatti’s credibility,” which starts out highlighting a 2012 dispute with a former business partner over a coffee chain investment in which accuser Patrick Dempsey said that Avenatti lied to him, while the company was also “reportedly involved in additional litigation implicating his credibility, in cluding one case in which a judge sanctioned his company for misconduct.”
Strange Clues in the Pipe Bomb Cases Indicate Possible Hoax and/ or a False Flag Motive
Retired FBI profiler James Fitzgerald said that the source of the pipe bombs could be a right-winger who doesn’t like the Dems, international actors, or a false flag, which is where the party that committed the crime frames another party. The timing of the bombs just ahead of the elections is suspicious as it casts Republicans in a negative light.
Some critics are calling the pipe bombs a hoax because none of them exploded and they appear to have been designed to be duds. In fact, the alarm function was missing on the clocks that were taped to the devices. Additionally, the lack of a postmark on the package that was sent to CNN indicates couriers that may have delivered the packages instead of the US Postal Service, the photograph of the bomb appears to have been taken by a non-professional instead of law enforcement, and the bombs had ‘Larry the Cable Guy’ ISIS flag parody stickers on them.
Who benefits? The bombs take the heat off of the left, which has promoted and enacted violence against conservatives, including the shooting of Congressman Steve Scalise in 2017 where the gunman fired more than 200 rounds, Antifa’s numerous assaults against Trump supporters and destruction of property, and threatening leftist mobs that use intimidation. Just two weeks ago, the White House, the Pentagon and Ted Cruz were the targets of ricin poison packages, yet the mainstream media downplayed the bio-attacks.
Update: Some of the 10 pipe bombs were not even capable of being exploded, according to a new report on that cited several law enforcement officials.
Pipe Bombs Sent to Soros, Clinton, Obama, Maxine Waters, Eric Holder, John Brennan, Joe Biden and Robert DeNiro
Pipe bombs were mailed to prominent Democrats, including George Soros, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Representative Maxine Waters, and former Attorney General Eric Holder. Another was sent to the CNN station in New York and was addressed to former Director of the CIA John Brennan. On Thursday morning, former Vice President Joe Biden and actor Robert DeNiro, an outspoken and vulgar critic against Trump. None of the bombs were detonated. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said his office received a similar package, but New York police officials said the office was cleared and no device was found. Law enforcement officials said all the packages were similar: manila envelopes with bubble-wrap interior bearing six stamps and the return address of disgraced Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the former chair of the DNC who was accused of rigging the nominee process in favor of Hillary Clinton.
A wave of glass-filled pipe bombs targeting Hillary Clinton, former President Barack Obama, other prominent Democrats and CNN was thwarted without physical harm, but an anxiety-filled day on Wednesday deepened political tensions and fears two weeks before national midterm elections.
None of the bombs detonated as law enforcement took them away for examination and disposal.
The first crude bomb to be discovered had been delivered Monday to the suburban New York compound of George Soros, a liberal billionaire and major contributor to Democratic causes. The FBI said an additional package was intended for former Attorney General Eric Holder, but that one ended up at a Florida office of Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, whose return address was on it.
Later Wednesday, the FBI said two additional packages addressed for Rep. Maxine Waters had been intercepted that were similar in appearance to five others.
The targets of the bombs were some of the figures most frequently criticized by President Donald Trump, who still assails Clinton at rallies while supporters chant “lock her up” – two years after he defeated her and she largely left the political scene. Trump accuses Soros of paying protesters and singles out cable news network CNN as he rails against the “fake news” media.
States Can Stop the Migrant Caravan ‘Invasion’ Using Their Military Forces Under Constitutional ‘War Powers’
Ken Cuccinelli, the former Attorney General of Virginia, revealed that individual states have a Constitutional remedy for stopping the migrant caravan at the border and eliminates due process and catch-and-release. If a state is invaded, they may invoke ‘war powers’ which allows the state, without permission from anyone, to have a military response to the invaders. The migrant caravan stormed through Mexico last week, tearing down a border barrier in the process as they crossed from Guatemala to Mexico, and may certainly be considered invaders.
President of the Senate Conservatives Fund and former Attorney General of Virginia Ken Cuccinelli says the United States Constitution uniquely gives states the authority to stop the “invasion” of a migrant caravan headed to the U.S.-Mexico border.
In an exclusive interview with SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Daily, Cuccinelli explained to Breitbart News Political Editor Matt Boyle how the states can halt the 7,000-strong migrant caravan that is marching to the U.S. through Mexico, designed to overwhelm the country’s asylum and immigration system.
Article 1 Section 10 of the Constitution, third paragraph, lists some things that the states can do under some certain circumstances. And [the Constutition] says that no state shall enter into war without the permission of Congress unless they are actually invaded. Well, here it comes. [Emphasis added]
First of all, we’ve been being invaded for a long time so the border states clearly qualify here to utilize this power themselves. And what’s interesting is they don’t need anyone’s permission. And because [the states are] acting under war powers, there’s no due process. They can literally just line their National Guard up — presumably with riot gear like they would if they had a civil disturbance — and turn people back at the border. Literally, you don’t have to keep them, no catch-and-release, no nothing. You just point them back across the river and let them swim for it. Maybe you have a little courtesy shuttle and drive them over … and leave them there. The states can do that, interestingly enough, and the federal government can’t. [Emphasis added]
When someone comes across your border without your permission, it’s an invasion. Their purpose here is to violate the border, to violate our sovereignty for their own purposes. That’s an invasion. And here, I don’t think with the caravan it’s even debatable because you’ve got an entire group that’s organized itself to come into the country. [Emphasis added]
Listen to Cuccinelli’s full interview here:
President Trump on Monday announced that he would begin the process of cutting off foreign aid to Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador for their inability to stop the migrant caravan from marching up to the U.S.-Mexico border. The president also called the caravan a “national emergency.”
The Central American countries receive more than $500 million in federal aid from the U.S. every year. Trump has not yet indicated how much of that federal aid will be cut.
Four Ways that President Trump Can Stop the ‘Invasion’ of the Caravan Hordes
Representative Louis Gohmert (R-TX) revealed that President has four avenues to thwart the migrant caravan that include: Closing the border, shutting down bogus asylum claims, refusing entry to caravan migrants, and mandating that asylum claims be made in the embassies of the migrant’s home country, not at a Port of Entry. He also said that asylum claims are not legitimate if the claim is not made in the first country the asylum seeker reaches. The DOJ must investigate who is funding the caravan as it can be prosecuted under RICO laws.
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) says a 7,000-person migrant caravan that is headed to the U.S.-Mexico border is “an invasion” that President Trump has the executive power to stop.
In an interview with Fox News, Gohmert said Trump has the power executively “to stop an invasion,” which in this case is the migrant caravan.
“[President Trump] has made clear that this basically is an invasion and it needs to be stopped,” Gohmert said.
“In an emergency situation, he has additional powers. But he doesn’t even need those powers to stop an invasion coming across and say, ‘We’re closing the border, Mexico, until you disperse all of these people and do not allow them to come to our border,’” Gohmert continued.
The Texas congressman cited a Breitbart News report where the Center for Immigration Studies Director of Policy Jessica Vaughan detailed four ways that the migrant caravan can be halted before the foreign nationals try to cross into the U.S.
Those four avenues Trump can take in regards to the caravan include: Closing the border, shutting down bogus asylum claims, refusing entry to caravan migrants, and mandating that asylum claims be made in the embassies of the migrant’s home country, not at a Port of Entry.