HPIM0049

No 1071 “En mi opinión” Octubre 24, 2015

No 1071 “En mi opinión” Octubre 24, 2015

“IN GOD WE TRUST” Lázaro R Gonzalez Miño  Editor

Lázaro R González Miño  para  Alcalde de Miami Dade

AMENPER: Lobistas y Contribuyentes a las campañas políticas

Estas son dos cosas que se mencionan como algo turbio, corrupto, y muchas veces lo es, pero no la ocupación de lobista ni las contribuciones a políticos necesariamente se trata de soborno y poder. Lo principal no es generalizar, pero buscar en cada caso donde está la corrupción y donde la honradez.

El trabajo honrado de los lobistas es dar a conocer a los legisladores el proyecto de ley de su empleador, el político no tiene tiempo no deseos de leer la ley y le es más fácil recibir la información de los lobistas, y hay lobistas de las dos partes.  Es como en el caso de los propagandistas de productos médicos con los médicos, que reciben la información del propagandista de uno u otro producto.

Pudiera un médico o un político ser sobornado, pero no es la regla, lo que pasa es que los escándalos son más visibles que el trabajo honrado.

También es lo mismo el caso de los contribuyentes, no necesariamente es un soborno al político el contribuir con ellos. Aunque sucede bastante, sobre todo a nivel municipal, donde la visibilidad de menor.  Pero regularmente lo que sucede a niveles superiores donde las posiciones son mas importantes y más visibles,  es lo opuesto, los contribuyentes ayudan a los políticos que apoyan ya a las leyes que le convienen mejor ya sea por interés monetario o por filosofía política.  Para poner un ejemplo que todos podemos entender, cuando los cubanos estábamos más organizados para luchar contra Fidel Castro, el power pack cubano de exilados en Washington, contribuía monetariamente con los candidatos que estaban con nuestra lucha, nunca se pagaba a un candidato que sabíamos que era izquierdista y simpatizaba con el socialismo.  O sea no se compraba, se ayudaba a los que ya nos estaban ayudando para que fueran re-electos.

Como siempre no digo lo de arriba por gusto, siempre estas letanías tienen cola.  El caso que quiero tratar es el del millonario George Koch, uno de los hermanos Koch, mencionado por los demócratas con desprecio por su contribución a políticos contrarios a los liberales en diferentes elecciones.

Los hermanos Koch tienen empresas que van desde materiales de madera y papel, fertilizantes y petroquímica,  con un valor de  más de $ 100 billones y han creado una institución próspera,  que emplea a casi 100.000 personas en sus  negocios.  Creo que han sido más beneficiosos para la nación que un organizador comunitario.

Los hermanos  Koch, son  libertarios que expresan a menudo sus opiniones y siempre están en  disposición a financiar la causa política que consideran apropiada.

Usualmente Paul Rand ha sido el más beneficiado, pero este año han sugerido que pudieran apoyar a Marco Rubio, y ha habido personas que han dicho que Rubio se ha vendido a los hermanos Koch.

Pero analicemos el asunto, los Koch saben lo que piensa Rubio en cuanto a política internacional, que es opuesto a la filosofía libertaria.

Rubio no va a cambiar su posición en cuanto a la defensa del país, es y siempre ha sido parte de su filosofía, no va a apoyar como el libertario Paul, las relaciones con Cuba. 

Koch sabe esto, la ayuda no se la da por esto, pero ellos ven en Rubio a un político de derecha que quiere un gobierno pequeño y rebajar los impuestos, y saben que puede ser electo, y que Rand Paul no tiene el menor chance.  O sea que Rubio no va a ser comprado por los Koch para que haga lo que ya hace, van a ayudarlo porque lo que él está apoyando, lo apoyan por lo que predica de la filosofía  conservadora que en lo económico coincide con las ideas libertarias.  Si lo estuvieran comprando, sería lo contrario, sería que Rubio no quisiera un gobierno pequeño y bajos impuestos, y al ser ayudado cambiara su filosofía.

En general a nivel presidencial, las contribuciones no compran a los candidatos, los contribuyente simplemente premian a los candidatos que ya tienen la política que ellos prefieren.

Pero es más simple generalizar, si recibes dinero de un millonario para tu campaña te están comprando.

Pero no dice eso cuando se trata de  grupos de intereses comunitarios de tendencia izquierdista, , grupos que suman miles y  que cubren una gama amplia de intereses de izquierda, pero a ellos nadie los llaman sobornadores pero servidores públicos.

Por mencionar unos cuantos de los miles que hay, influenciando en nuestros gobernantes y políticos más que el más corrupto lobista de Washington, ustedes las conocen,  empezando por el famoso el Sierra Club (Environment) que lo que hacen es crear industrias políticamente correctas como la favorita de Obama, Solyndra, que pierden el dinero no de ellos pero de los contribuyentes  la AARP (American Association of Retired People) que defiende más el aborto el matrimonio homosexual que a los viejos retirados que pagan su cuota, la NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) para apoyar leyes que benefician a los negros, y no se ocupan de los blancos porque son unos negros racistas, NOW (National Organization of Women) que son los que nos han metidos las leyes feministas, y la mayoría no son mujeres son del tercer sexo,  ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) que están a veces reclamando derechos que se apartan de la libertad, PIRGs (Public Interest Research Groups) que lo único que investigan es lo que conviene a la agenda izquierdista, la NEA (National Education Association) Que lo que simplemente quiere es que los maestros se plieguen a sus agendas.

A estos no le dicen que son lobistas ni que son contribuyentes que están comprando a los políticos, pero sin lugar a dudas eso es lo que hacen, compran a los políticos o con dinero o con las amenazas de retirarle los votos de su grupo.

 

AMENPER: ABOUT IMMIGRANTS

When and by whom was this written?……

The United States has never held out any incitements to induce the subjects of any other sovereign to abandon their own country, to become inhabitants of this country.

From motives of humanity it has occasionally furnished facilities to emigrants who, having arrived here with views of forming settlements, have specially needed such assistance to carry them into effect. Neither the general government of the union, nor those of the individual states, are ignorant or unobservant of the additional strength and wealth, which accrues to the nation, by the accession of a mass of healthy, industrious, and frugal laborers, nor are they in any manner insensible to the great benefits which this country has derived, and continues to derive, from the influx of such adoptive children from other countries.

But there is one principle which pervades all the institutions of this country, and which must always operate as an obstacle to the granting of favors to new comers. This is a land, not of privileges, but of equal rights. Privileges are granted by sovereigns to particular classes of individuals, for purposes of general policy; but the general impression here is that privileges granted to one denomination of people, can very seldom be discriminated from erosions of the rights of others.

Emigrants coming here, are not to expect favors from the governments. They are to expect, if they choose to become citizens, equal rights with those of the natives of the country. They are to expect, if affluent, to possess the means of making their property productive, with moderation, and with safety;—if indigent, but industrious, honest and frugal, the means of obtaining easy and comfortable subsistence for themselves and their families.

Immigrants ‘come to a life of independence, but to a life of labor—and, if they cannot accommodate themselves to the character, moral, political, and physical, of this country, with all its compensating balances of good and evil, borders are always open to them, to return to the land of their nativity and their fathers.

To one thing they must make up their minds, or, they will be disappointed in every expectation of happiness as Americans. They must cast off the old country skin, never to resume it. They must look forward to their posterity, rather than backward to their ancestors; they must be sure that whatever their own feelings may be, those of their children will cling to the prejudices of this country, and will partake of that proud spirit, not unmingled with disdain, which you have observed is remarkable in the general character of this people, and as perhaps belonging peculiarly to those of foreign descent, born in this country.

That feeling of superiority over other nations which you have noticed, and which has been so offensive to other strangers, who have visited these shores, arises from the consciousness of every individual that, as a member of society, no man in the country is above him; and, exulting in this sentiment, he looks down upon those nations where the mass of the people feel themselves the inferiors of privileged classes, and where men are high or low, according to the accidents of their birth.

‘No government in the world possesses so few means of bestowing favors, as the government of the United States.’

But hence it is that no government in the world possesses so few means of bestowing favors, as the government of the United States. The governments are the servants of the people, and are so considered by the people, who place and displace them at their pleasure. They are chosen to manage for short periods the common concerns, and when they cease to give satisfaction, they cease to be employed. If the powers, however, of the government to do good are restricted, those of doing harm are still more limited. The dependence, in affairs of government, is the reverse of the practice in other countries, instead of the people depending upon their rulers, the rulers, as such, are always dependent upon the good will of the people.

We understand perfectly, that of the multitude of foreigners who yearly flock to our shores, to take up here their abode, none come from affection or regard to a land to which they are total strangers, and with the very language of which, those of them who are from other lands are generally unacquainted. We know that they come with views, not to our benefit, but to their own—not to promote our welfare, but to better their own condition.

We expect therefore very few, if any transplanted countrymen from classes of people who enjoy happiness, ease, or even comfort, in their native climes. The happy and contented remain at home, and it requires an impulse, at least as keen as that of urgent want, to drive a man from the soil of his nativity and the land of his father’s sepulchers. Of the very few emigrants of more fortunate classes, who ever make the attempt of settling in this country, a principal proportion sicken at the strangeness of our manners, and after a residence, more or less protracted, return to the countries whence they came.

I regret that it is not in my power to add the inducement which you might perceive in the situation of an officer under the government. All the places in the department to which I belong, allowed by the laws, are filled, nor is there a prospect of an early vacancy in any of them. Whenever such vacancies occur, the applications from natives of the country to fill them, are far more numerous than the offices, and the recommendations in behalf of the candidates so strong and so earnest, that it would seldom be possible, if it would ever be just, to give a preference over them to foreigners

This letter was written in 1819, by John Quincy Adams then secretary of State under President James Monroe.  Years change things, but some things are forever.

 

SOBRE INMIGRANTES

¿Cuando y por quién fue esto escrito?…

Los Estados Unidos no ha nunca sostenido ningunas incitaciones para inducir a los sujetos de cualquier otro país soberano a abandonar su propio país, para convertirse en habitantes de este.

Por motivos de humanidad de vez en cuando han equipado las instalaciones a los emigrantes que, habiendo llegado aquí con vistas de la formación de asentamientos, especialmente han necesitado asistencia para llevar a efecto la transición.

El gobierno general de la Unión, ni los de los Estados, son ignorantes o desatentos de la fuerza adicional y riqueza, que se acumula a la nación, por el ingreso de una masa de sana, trabajadora, de trabajadores frugales, ni son de ninguna manera insensible a los grandes beneficios que este país ha derivado y puede derivar, de la afluencia de estos hijos adoptivos de otros países.

Pero hay un principio que impregna todas las instituciones de este país, y que siempre debe operar como un obstáculo para la concesión de favores a los recién llegados.

Esta es una tierra, no de privilegios, sino igualdad de derechos.

Privilegios son concedidos por los soberanos para determinadas clases de personas, con fines de política general; pero aquí la costumbre general es que privilegios concedidos a una denominación de personas, muy rara vez puede ser separados de erosiones de los derechos de los demás.

Los emigrantes que vienen aquí, no deben esperar favores de los gobiernos. Deben esperar, si desean convertirse en ciudadanos, con igualdad de derechos con los de los nativos del país. Deben esperar, si es afluente, a poseer los medios de hacer su propiedad productiva, con moderación y con seguridad; — si indigentes, pero laboriosos, honestos y frugales, los medios de obtener fácil y cómoda subsistencia para ellos y sus familias.

Los inmigrantes no vienen solo a una vida de independencia, sino a una vida de trabajo — y, si ellos no pueden acomodarse al carácter, moral, política y física de este país, con todos sus saldos compensadores del bien y del mal, las fronteras están siempre abiertas para ellos, para volver a la tierra de su nacimiento y sus padres.

A una cosa se deben decidir, o quedarán decepcionados en toda expectativa de felicidad como los americanos. Debe deshacerse de la piel de viejo país, nunca para reanudarlo. Deben aspirar a su posteridad, en vez de al revés a la de sus antepasados; deben de estar seguros de que cualquiera que sea sus propios sentimientos, de sus hijos se aferren a las costumbre de este país y participarán de ese espíritu orgulloso, no sea con desprecio, lo que han observado es notable en el carácter general de este pueblo y como tal vez que pertenece peculiarmente a aquellos de ascendencia extranjera, nacido en este país.

Ese sentimiento de superioridad sobre otras naciones que han notado, y que ha sido tan ofensivo a otros extranjeros, que visitaron estas costas, surge de la conciencia de cada individuo que, como miembro de la sociedad, ningún hombre en el país está por encima de él; y gloriando en este sentimiento, él mira hacia abajo en aquellas naciones donde la masa de las personas se sienten inferiores de clases privilegiadas, y donde los hombres son de clases alta o baja, según los accidentes de su nacimiento.

Ningún gobierno del mundo posee tan pocos medios de otorgar favores, como el gobierno de los Estados Unidos.

 Los gobiernos americanos son servidores del pueblo y son considerados así por la gente, que los coloca y desplaza a su placer. Son elegidos para administrar por periodos cortos las preocupaciones comunes, y cuando dejan de dar satisfacción, dejan de ser empleados.

Los  poderes del gobierno para hacer el bien, sin embargo, están restringidos, los poderes de hacer daño son aún más limitados. La dependencia, en asuntos de gobierno, es el reverso de la práctica en otros países, en lugares donde las personas dependen de sus gobernantes, los gobernantes, en América como tal, los gobiernos siempre son dependientes de la buena voluntad de la gente.

Entendemos perfectamente, que de la multitud de extranjeros que anualmente acuden a nuestras costas, para hacer aquí su morada, no vienen con afecto respecto a una tierra en los que son totalmente extraños y con un lenguaje del cuál son generalmente ignorantes.

Sabemos que vienen con vista, no para nuestro beneficio, sino a su propio, no para promover nuestro bienestar, sino para mejorar su condición.

Esperamos que por lo tanto muy pocos, si cualquiera de las clases de personas que disfrutan de la felicidad, facilidad y comodidad  en sus climas nativos emigra.  Porque ese ciudadano, feliz y contento permanece en casa, y requiere un impulso, por lo menos tan entusiasta como la de urgente necesidad para conducir a un hombre a salir de la tierra de su nacimiento y la tierra de los sepulcros de su padre. De los muy pocos emigrantes de las clases más afortunadas, que siempre hacen el intento de establecerse en este país, una parte principal se enferman en la extrañeza de nuestras costumbres y después de una residencia, más o menos prolongada, vuelven a los países de donde vinieron.

Lamento que no esté en mi poder para añadir el aliciente que podría percibir en la situación de un funcionario en el gobierno. Se llenan todos los lugares en el Departamento al que pertenezco, permitido por las leyes, ni hay una posibilidad de una temprana vacante en alguno de ellos. Cuando se producen dichas vacantes, las aplicaciones de nativos del país para llenarlos, son mucho más numerosas que los puestos de trabajo, y las recomendaciones a favor de los candidatos son tan fuerte y tan serios, que rara vez sería posible, si alguna vez fuera, darle preferencia sobre ellos a los extranjeros.

Esto fue escrito en 1819 por John Quincy Adams, entonces secretario de estado bajo el presidente James Monroe.  Los años cambian las cosas, pero hay cosas que permaneces igual para siempre.

 

 

 

AMENPER: La Envidia en la sociedad y la Situación Racial

En la competencia, la ambición individual sirve al bien común” (Adam Smith).

En una situación dada, si existe una determinada cantidad de jugadores, cada uno con estrategias que le aporta determinadas ganancias personales, existe un equilibrio. Luego, en el caso que al menos un jugador no obtenga su máxima ganancia, si se beneficia de las ganancias de la comunidad, el sistema seguirá en equilibrio, pero si no se conforma con haber recibido menos por su capacidad o ética de trabajo y se deje llevar por la envidia, la sociedad no estará en equilibrio y tendrá perturbaciones hasta que se logre el nuevo equilibrio. Es en esta última consecuencia donde se parece refutar la teoría de Smith, ya que al parecer si al menos un participante no obtiene su máxima ganancia, este estará disconforme y tratara de desequilibrar el sistema. Pero este defecto no está en la teoría de Smith, está en las bajas pasiones de ciertos individuos que descalabran el bien común.

El tipo de ambición a la que se refiere Smith, puede ser y es una fuerza poderosa para bien en nuestras vidas. Pero sólo si es legítimo. A veces mal interpretado y a menudo mal entendido, ambición – verdadera ambición – no es una cualidad egoísta. No es otra palabra para despiadado; no es algo a ser rechazada o sometido. Ambición legítima es un rasgo honorable. En su mejor forma, nuestra ambición sirve nosotros y otras personas. De hecho, perseguir su ambición es una de las cosas más desinteresadas que puede hacer.  La verdadera ambición es disciplinada, impaciente del deseo de logro. Es un estado de ánimo, una forma de vida. Con el poder de ambición puede hacerse cargo de su propia felicidad personal, trazar su propio rumbo por la vida y dejar su legítima ambición crear lo que desea, dejar llevarte a donde quieras ir manteniendo tu propio equilibrio y ayudando a mantener el equilibrio de la sociedad.

Lo que critican de la teoría de Adam Smith no es en sí la teoría, es precisamente la desviación de la teoría por la envidia.

La envidia es como una pieza de hierro que traba el engranaje de la creación de las riquezas de las naciones.  El triunfo de los que generan la riqueza, trae la envidia, la envidia genera rencor, y el rencor genera la desestabilización de la sociedad.  Los que generan las riquezas son despojados del fruto de su trabajo y erradicados de la sociedad, que pierde sus capacidad creadora, y todo por el rencor de la envidia.  El rencor es el combustible para la lucha de clases que mantiene el socialismo vigente a pesar de su fracaso donde quiera que se impone.

Los que vivimos el odio y el rencor que surgió de la envidia durante la transición al comunismo en nuestra patria, con el tiempo hemos sido testigos de que la satisfacción de despojar a los que consideraban privilegiados no les trajo beneficios, que han vivido una vida peor que la que tenían en la otra sociedad, quizás ahora se hayan dado cuenta que el rencor les había tergiversado la razón.

Los Estados Unidos era posiblemente donde la ambición y el triunfo que esta deriva en sus ciudadanos era visto con agrado y admiración, a los triunfadores se les trataba de imitar no de envidiar, eran un ejemplo de que ellos también pudieran tener la misma oportunidad.

Cuando hoy oímos los gritos de desigualdad con rencor y odio de clases en los Estados Unidos, nos parece que estamos de nuevo en la Cuba de los cincuenta.

La envidia es una emoción que ciega a la razón.  Cuando vemos a la sociedad negra que se queja de la falta de oportunidades, y cuando surge un ejemplo de uno de la clase que llega a una posición destacada en la sociedad, en vez de admirarlo e imitarlo, lo critican si no tiene la agenda de la dependencia que tiene a esta clase esclavizada viviendo de la emoción de la envidia y el rencor.

Así que subdividen a los negros triunfadores en la política como negros legítimos porque predican la dependencia, y a los negros que no lo hacen los clasifican cómo galleticas Oreo, negros por fuera con crema blanca en el medio.

Los gritos de discriminación no pueden ser más infundados, tienen un presidente negro, el fiscal general de la nación es negro, hay un negro en el tribunal supremo y hay negros en todas las instituciones. 

El partido que llaman el de la discriminación tiene a un negro cómo puntero en las encuestas para presidente del país, y hay cientos de negros millonarios.

Pero hay blancos y negros profesionales que se dedican a crear la envidia para mantener a la clase negra en la dependencia y esclavos de su vertiente política.

Y ellos siguen conduciendo su vida con el  odio y el rencor alimentados por el combustible de la envidia..

15650

Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images

Hilary Clinton’s 5 biggest lies in her Benghazi testimony… by BEN SHAPIRO22 Oct 2015

Vice President Joe Biden’s announcement on Wednesday that he would not run for president of the United States made it a foregone conclusion that the media would worship at the shrine of Hillary Clinton during her Benghazi testimony on Thursday.

They have no other choice. The precious must be protected at all costs, which means covering up for her lies, her calculated obfuscations, and her charmless faux-gravity.

Already the narrative has been set: Hillary Clinton was a victim of a political Benghazi committee dedicated to her destruction. Every Congressional committee in history has entailed some political motivation—would anyone argue that the Watergate investigations were completely apolitical?—but the media myopically focused on the idiotic comments of

Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA)

45%

 before Hillary’s testimony, crafting the story of her victimization before it had even taken place.

Hillary, as always, is the poor, put-upon victim of a vast right-wing conspiracy. She set up a private email server and deleted relevant emails from it for purely political reasons; she pressed for a pointless invasion of Libya for political reasons, chortled at its conquest for political reasons, watched it descend into chaos while doing nothing for political reasons, and then allowed her ambassador to twist in the Libyan tornado without proper security for political reasons; finally, she covered up that disaster by lying about its causes for political reasons. But those who ask questions about such matters are partisan politicians.

As Charles Krauthammer rightly observed on Thursday evening, “We’re not going to get the facts, we’re not going to get the real story underlying it. We’re living in an age where what you say and its relation with the facts is completely irrelevant.”

But after 11 hours of lying—which is only slightly longer than the hours Hillary and her boss’ administration did virtually nothing as Americans died under fire in Benghazi—we may as well examine Hillary’s most important lies.

Hillary Cared Deeply About the Human Cost.

Hillary kept claiming that she cared deeply about her good friend Chris Stevens. At one point, she whipped out her pre-planned righteous indignation to complain, “I would imagine I’ve thought more about what happened than all of you put together. I’ve lost more sleep than all of you put together.” This was salt in the wound, the equivalent of Johnny Cochrane lamenting his worries over the fate of Nicole Brown Simpson.

Hillary admitted in her testimony on Thursday that her good friend Chris Stevens did not have her private email address, and that she could recall no conversations with him after he became ambassador to Libya. The night of his death, she wrote an email with the subject line: “Chris Smith,” conflating his death with that of diplomat Sean Smith. She didn’t bother speaking with survivors of the attacks until days later.

As to the notion that Hillary lost sleep, she apparently didn’t the night of the attack—she went home instead of sticking around at the State Department or heading over to the White House, because, she said, she had to prepare for what would be a rough rest of the week. She didn’t talk to then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta or Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey. We do know that she spent the night alone, a fact which led her to chortle. Hillary may have lost sleep over her failures later—clearly, she spent some time coming up with lies about a YouTube video.

Hillary Thought The Attacks Had Something to Do With a YouTube Video.

Hillary maintained on Thursday that she believed the attack still had something to do with the YouTube video, “The Innocence of Muslims.” But the night of the attack, she emailed Chelsea Clinton and told her that an al-Qaeda-like group had killed the ambassador. As

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH)

94%

 said to Clinton, “You tell the American people one thing. You tell your family an entirely different story.”

In fact, Hillary told the Egyptian Prime Minister the day after the attacks, “We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack. Not a protest.” Hillary tried to state that she had actually told people that some people were pinning the attack on the video, but she herself pinned the attacks on the YouTube video in videos released in Pakistan. She lied, because it was obvious that she had failed in her central duty to protect her diplomats in the most dangerous part of the world—a part of the world she had made more dangerous with her favorite invasion.

Hillary Didn’t Use Sidney Blumenthal As an Advisor.

Hillary Clinton had reams of email exchanges with hitman Sidney Blumenthal. Blumenthal had been banned from the Obama administration for his corruption and Clintonian loyalties. Hillary said that the emails were unsolicited. 

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC)

85%

 shot that idiocy down easily: “You wrote to him, ‘Thanks and please keep them coming,’ ‘Greetings from Kabul and thanks for keeping this stuff coming, any other info about it?’ ‘What are you hearing now?’” Hillary then tried to amend her statement by saying they began as unsolicited emails. Hillary used Blumenthal as an advisor, and she routinely corresponded with him. Any implication to the contrary is absolutely false.

Hillary Was Transparent About Her Emails.

Hillary insisted again on Thursday that she’d been fully transparent about her emails. Even the State Department has rejected that nonsense repeatedly. The hearings did provide some perspective into just why Hillary might have deleted 30,000 emails, however, she claimed that her correspondence about Libya, which dropped dramatically from 2011 to 2012, was not because she cared less about the country—it was because she had people shuttling documents to her in suitcases. In fact, she said, she didn’t even have a computer in her office. A State Department email address could have confirmed whether any of that was true. Now we will presumably never know.

Chris Stevens Was Responsible for His Own Death.

The most despicable lie of the day came from Hillary’s defense of her own conduct via ripping Chris Stevens, the dead ambassador. She spent virtually the entire day suggesting that Stevens knew the risks of his job, that he accepted those risks, and that he died knowing those risks. She even said that Stevens “felt comfortable” on the ground. If that is true, it’s certainly odd that the State Department team in Libya asked for more security over 600 times. Hillary said she didn’t receive any of those requests and blamed her security team for not granting more security—all the while saying she took responsibility for what had happened.

Then, the capper: Hillary said that when Stevens wrote an email asking about whether the Benghazi compound would be closed, he was just being a sly jokester. She said, “One of the great attributes that Chris Stevens had was a really good sense of humor, and I just see him smiling as he’s typing this because it’s clearly in response to the email down below talking about picking up a few ‘fire sale items from the Brits.’” When told that those “fire sale items” were security barricades, Hillary answered, “Well, I thought it showed their entrepreneurial spirit.” Disgusting.

 

Hillary Clinton was largely responsible for a pointless invasion of Libya, which promptly turned into a terrorist-run hellhole. She was responsible for the security of her diplomats in Libya, but she didn’t provide for it. She had no correspondence with those diplomats on the ground but plenty of time for Sidney Blumenthal. When those diplomats and those who ran to help them were killed, she blamed a YouTube video. And finally, she used her jerry-rigged email server to selectively edit the material the public would see.

But don’t worry—Hillary’s the victim. Republicans are the perpetrators. And Chris Stevens is just one more bump in the road on her journey to the White House.

Ben Shapiro is Senior Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News, Editor-in-Chief of DailyWire.com, and the New York Times bestselling author, most recently, of the book,The People vs. Barack Obama: The Criminal Case Against The Obama Administration (Threshold Editions, June 10, 2014). Follow Ben Shapiro on Twitter @benshapiro.

 

 

GOVERNMENT

The One Question Trey Gowdy Struggled to Answer Following Clinton’s Benghazi Testimony

Oliver Darcy

SHARES

  • Share This
  • Tweet This

The chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi could not say Thursday whether an extensive 11-hour hearing with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton revealed anything new about the deadly 2012 terror attacks in Libya.

When asked what new information the hearing provided the public with, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) paused momentarily.

“Uh,” he said. “I think some of Jimmy Jordan’s questioning — well, when you say new today, we knew some of that already. We knew about the emails.”

“In terms of her testimony, I don’t know that she testified that much differently today than she has the previous times she testified,” the South Carolina Republican added.

Gowdy said he would “have to go back and look at the transcript” to better be able to answer the question.

The inability for the chairman of the controversial committee to answer the question would most certainly be used by the Clinton campaign in its efforts to portray the hearing as a partisan witch hunt. In recent weeks, Clinton and her surrogates have seized on comments made by two House Republicans to contend the committee was formed to weaken her poll numbers heading into the 2016 presidential elections.

 

 

JIMMY CARTER HIZO ENTREGA A RUSIA DE MAPA DE POSICIONES DEL ESTADO ISLÁMICO. UD LE PONE EL CALIFICATIVO QUE CREA LE CORRESPONDE A ESA ACCIÓN

Posted on October 23, 2015 by Nuevo Accion                                             Según ha revelado ayer jueves el Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Rusia, el pasado mes de mayo el expresidente de Estados Unidos Jimmy Carter entregó a Rusia mapas en los que aparecen fijadas las posiciones del Estado Islámico y otros grupos en Siria.

El propi ex presidente Carter confirmó que en mayo entregó a la Embajada de Rusia mapas con las posiciones de los terroristas del Estado Islámico en Siria después de hablar con el presidente ruso, Vladímir Putin.

“Puedo confirmar que esta información coincide con la realidad.De hecho, Jimmy Carter se dirigió a la parte rusa con la propuesta de enviarnos los mapas elaborados por su centro presidencial que muestran la ubicación actual de las partes del conflicto sirio, incluidas las posiciones de las tropas del Gobierno, del Estado Islámico y otras agrupaciones“, afirmó Zajárova  del Ministerio de Relaciones exteriores de Rusia.

This entry was posted in Articulos and tagged ¿Cómo calificaría Ud. esa actuaciónde Mapa de posiciones del Estado Islámicode Un ex Presidente de USA?hizo entrega a RusiaJimmy Carter by Nuevo Accion.Bookmark the permalink.

Un Comentario sobre “JIMMY CARTER HIZO ENTREGA A RUSIA DE MAPA DE POSICIONES DEL ESTADO ISLÁMICO. UD LE PONE EL CALIFICATIVO QUE CREA LE CORRESPONDE A ESA ACCIÓN”

  1. Javier Monzonon October 23, 2015 at 2:39 pm said:

Si Mr. Carter posee mejores mapas que los rusos con todos sus espias, hay que decir: “que j…estan los rusos!”.

 

 

Donald Trump On Today’s Benghazi Hearing and State of the 2016 Race

by Hugh Hewitt

Donald Trump joined me today top discuss the Benghazi hearing with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the state of the 2016 GOP race for the nomination to face her in the general election:

Audio:

10-22hhs-trump

Transcript:

HH: On a day of huge headlines from Capitol Hill and from polling around the country, Donald Trump has surged to a commanding lead in the Washington Post/ABC poll. He’s ahead in the Bowling Green University poll in Ohio, and in fact, he leads every poll I’ve seen except one with Iowa. We’ll talk about that, but Donald Trump, welcome back to the Hugh Hewitt Show, great to talk to you.

DT: Great to be with you, Hugh.

HH: Let me begin with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Have you had a chance to watch any of today’s hearings?

DT: No, I want to get your input, because I actually watched her first five minutes, and then I had to go, because I had a big meeting. And I thought her opening remarks really looked bad, but I don’t know. I have not been hearing positive things. How is she doing?

HH: Terribly. There are smoking guns all over the place. It’s an armory of smoking guns. Let me play for you one exchange. This is Congressman Mike Pompeo talking to her, Donald Trump, about security at the embassy.

MP: Do you know how many security requests there were in the 1st quarter of 2012?

HRC: For everyone or for Benghazi?

MP: For, I’m sorry, yes, ma’am, related to Benghazi and Libya. Do you know how many there were?

HRC: No, I do not know.

MP: Ma’am, there were just over a hundred-plus. In the 2nd quarter, do you know how many there were?

HRC: No, I do not.

MP: Ma’am, there were 172ish. Might have been 171 or 173. That’s…how many were there in July and August, and then that week and a few days before the attacks, do you know?

HRC: There were a number of them. I know that.

MP: Yes, ma’am, 83, by our count. That’s over 600 requests. You’ve testified here this morning that you had none of those reach your desk. Is that correct also?

HRC: That’s correct.

MP: Madame Secretary, Mr. Blumenthal wrote you 150 emails. It appears from the materials that we’ve read that all of those reached your desk.

HH: What do you make of that, Donald Trump?

DT: Wow, that’s unbelievable. That sounds pretty amazing. So these were requests for protection, essentially?

HH: Yes.

DT: Wow, that’s not good. So hundreds and hundreds of requests? I would say that doesn’t sound so good. I mean, I just saw, you know, it was very interesting, because I did have to leave, and I watched maybe five or six minutes, maybe ten minutes, her opening remarks, and the way she was reading them, it sounded terrible. The whole thing sounded terrible. And I thought, I was very, I was so looking forward, and I am looking forward, actually. You know, I’m going to Florida. I’m doing a big thing at Doral tomorrow, like thousands of people, and we’re going to have 15,000 people in Jacksonville, Florida. I said I have to go back upstairs. I don’t want to watch this hearing. But I can get, from you, I’ll get better than watching it. That’s the thing I like about you. So you think that, I mean, you think that she is not doing well?

HH: I think she’s doing terrible, and there’s one aspect I want to go to your Art of the Deal experience.

DT: Okay.

HH: She has listened to the [Congressmen] with her hand on her face, with her head, you know, cocked to one side contemptuously throughout hours and hours of testimony. When you see that at a negotiation, Donald Trump, what does that tell you?

DT: Well, I think she’s trying to feign boredom, but I think she probably wants to just get out of there. It really, you know, sort of indicates two things. But she’s trying to feign disdain and boredom. And it just sounded to me, I have other friends that have been watching it very studiously today, and they are really surprised. You know, when I watched Trey Gowdy on, I think it was Face The Nation this weekend, it sounded to me like he was not going to go after her that much, Hugh, because he was sort of saying well, we have other people, and she’s just a small part of it. It sounded to me like he was pulling back. But as I’m hearing it today, they’re not pulling back at all. They’re really going into it, and I’m just hearing she’s looking very bad. Maybe Biden did the wrong thing getting out yesterday.

HH: Maybe he did. Here is a second, the smoking gun exchange. This is Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan with the former Secretary of State.

JJ: In that email you sent to your family, here’s what you said at 11:00 that night, approximately one hour after you told the American people it was a video, you say to your family two officers were killed today in Benghazi by an al Qaeda-like group. So you tell the American people one thing, you tell your family an entirely different story. Also, on the night of the attack, you had a call with the president of Libya. Here’s what you said to him. Ansar al-Sharia is claiming responsibility. It’s interesting. Mr. Khattala, one of the guys arrested and charged, actually belonged to that group. And finally, and most significantly, the next day, within 24 hours, you had a conversation with the Egyptian prime minister. You told him this. We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack, not a protest. Let me read that one more time…

HH: Now Donald Trump, Lindsey Graham has called these the smoking gun emails.

DT: Yeah, well, it’s…

HH: What do you think?

DT: …certainly a part of it. It’s certainly a part of it, and it’s so different than what she’s been saying for so long. So that’s a problem for her. Wow. Very interesting.

HH: Do you think when you lose…

DT: You must be, you must find this very interesting, I would say, as a student. You must find this very interesting.

HH: Oh, I think her credibility is shattered, and I wonder, once you lose credibility, how do you get it back, Donald Trump?

DT: It’s very hard. It’s very hard, especially when you lose it in such a public forum. You know, a lot people are watching and want to watch it, and they’re going to be going home tonight, like me, and they want to devour it. And they want to see what’s going on. And I mean, just from the little bit that you’ve played for me. And plus, there’s a level of, you know, the questions are tough. They’re tough. The way they’re put is very tough. And…

HH: Let me ask you this. This is also occurred to me.

DT: I think it’s amazing.

HH: …as appropriate for Donald Trump. Lots of people want to get to you. Obviously, you’ve got hundreds of thousands of people want to get to you. They want you in their deals. They want your name, etc. If someone like Sidney Blumenthal gets through to you 130 times, and you respond to them, does that person have standing? Should we as an outsider say that person has standing with Donald Trump, or in this case, with Hillary?

DT: Yes, that person, that person has great standing, and Blumenthal obviously had great standing. Most people are not able to get through. I’d say 99.9, most people are not able to get through to somebody like Hillary. He gets through, and from what everybody tells me, this is not a good person. And this is not a person that she should be dealing with. And I think the President, as I remember from seeing it a long time ago, didn’t they even request that she not deal with him? They don’t like him.

HH: Yes.

DT: They don’t want him dealing with her? So she’s doing that behind the President’s back, and in theory, she’s working with the President and for the President. So I think that’s amazing, and I noticed how much he seemed, the access he seemed to have to her. And has that come up, yet, today?

HH: Oh, yeah, quite a lot. Sidney Blumenthal is in this hearing more than Ambassador Stevens is in this hearing.

DT: Wow.

HH: And it just goes to the fact that he basically owns a private channel. And does anyone have that to you, Donald Trump? If you’re the president of the United States, does anyone have a back channel to you that we should know about going in?

DT: I would say Ivanka, Ivanka Trump, okay?

HH: (laughing)

DT: Maybe nobody else. You know, it’s amazing, and what really amazed me is the level of hatred and I think distrust and everything else that the President had for Blumenthal. You know, it’s really surprising that she’d do that, because she actually, I thought somewhere along the line, sort of indicated like she wouldn’t be dealing with him much anymore.

HH: She did. Let me talk to you about secret servers, because the CIA director’s email’s been hacked. She had a secret server. These emails are now appearing. Are your emails at the Trump operation, and your servers’ protected? Does the private sector have an advantage here over government contracting?

DT: They’re in theory very secure, but you know, honestly, my emails are so boring, I would release them tomorrow. My emails are not exciting, and I’m not a big fan of the email stuff. You know, I’ve seen so many people have problems because of emails. I’ve watched it. And you know, going a step further, I’m not sure, I have a son who’s 9 years old. He’s so good with computers. And I’m not sure with computers that you know, as wonderful as they are in so many different ways, you know, we’re talking about technology. In the old days, when you wanted to attack, you’d have a courier with armed guards, and you’d have an envelope, and you’d give it to the general, right?

HH: Right.

DT: Now, you send it to the general, and you don’t have, you have no idea how many people are watching and reading, they’re, you know, they’re hacking your messages. It’s really pretty, I think MacArthur would not like the whole concept of computers. You understand what I mean. There are so many brilliant people out there that understand the innards of these machines, and when you look at heads of agencies that have been totally hacked, and I mean totally hacked, and I guess there was one yesterday or the day before where some young kid was hacking top people in different agencies.

HH: Yup.

DT: I mean, that’s pretty sad stuff. I’m not sure that you could stop it, to be honest with you.

HH: So are you going to, are you assuming that everything…

DT: I think computers are very, when you talk about lack of security, I think there’s a great lack of security with computers, I’ll tell you.

HH: Are you assuming that everything that you put on an email, or you put into a direct message, is public?

DT: I assume that.

HH: All right, that’s a good rule.

DT: And it’s totally illegal for people to do things about it, but I assume that when I send out emails, and when I sent, which are very seldom, frankly, I’m not a big believer. I like to do it as little as possible. But I assume that they’re being looked at by other people.

HH: All right, let’s move to the polls. As I said at the beginning, and I was on CNN this morning with Chris Cuomo, you’re ahead in the Washington Post poll by a lot.

DT: Right.

HH: Not insignificant, by a lot. You’re ahead in everything except this Iowa Quinnipiac poll. Why is that the outlier? What’s going on in Iowa?

DT: Well, I was very surprised to see it. You know, I was in Iowa last night. We had 4,000 people. It was packed. It was great. It was a lovefest. It was amazing. And I was actually surprised, I’m not saying that a thing like that can’t happen, but I was very, very surprised to see it, because I think we’re doing well in Iowa. I have a feeling we’re doing much better in Iowa than the polls are showing, if you want to know the truth. But we had an amazing crowd, I’m sure you saw it, because it was all over television.

HH: I did.

DT: I mean, I left there literally at 10:00 in the evening last night. I got home at 12:30, and I saw it on television, and everybody saw it. It was a big thing. It was really amazing. It was, the level of love in that room, and love for the country in that room, was absolutely beautiful to watch. And I was very surprised. I saw the poll. I was leading in Iowa, and not by a huge amount, but I was leading in Iowa, and I was very surprised to see that I wasn’t. That’s the only one I’ve had that I’m not leading. And you know, Massachusetts came out, I think it’s 48-12 or something like that.

HH: Yes, it’s huge.

DT: And so many have come out…

HH: The Emerson poll.

DT: But I was very surprised, I was really very surprised to see Iowa. It’s fine, but I was very surprised to see. I’m not sure I agree with it, and we’ll see what happens.

HH: Now polls are often wrong. They were wrong in Canada this week. They were wrong in Great Britain. They were wrong in Israel. They were wrong in the United States in the fall of 2014. Let’s talk about Canada. What do you think happened up there? Why did it go from a red with Stephen Harper to a deep blue with the young Trudeau boy?

DT: Well, Harper was there for a long time, and you know, when you’re there for a long time, a lot of times, people want to see change, not Obama change, you know, but they want to see change. They want to see something, somebody different. And he looks to me, I know very little about him, he’s on the liberal side, but he looks to me to be attractive. His father, I knew his father, actually, and his father was, you know, quite a character at the time. And he’s an attractive, young guy, and somehow he resonated. You know, it’s all about if you resonate. Let’s see, and he did resonate. There’s no question about it.

HH: Yeah, I shouldn’t have called him a boy. I meant son. I mean son, the Trudeau son, not the Trudeau boy. He’s 30-plus. He’s not a boy. He’s a man, but…

DT: Yeah.

HH: Have you spent much time in Canada? Do you know much about Canada?

DT: I do. I know something about some of the major cities in Toronto and other places.

HH: So what’s your opinion of that country? I mean, they’ve made a U-turn. It’s a big change.

DT: I love Canada. I think it’s an incredible country. It is heading in a different direction than you might love or I might love, but we’ll see what happens. He’s not overly liberal. You know, he’s, but he’s certainly a lot different than what you had in there before. There are many countries going that way. And there are a couple going the opposite way. I find, and have you watched this stuff just over the years, Hugh, you see the countries going, a lot of times they’ll go one direction and then boom, they swing back, and they usually go the opposite way. So it was very interesting to see that happen.

HH: They have a very open immigration policy there, and as you know, some of the 9/11 attackers came into this country from Canada.

DT: Right.

HH: Do we need more control of the Canadian border in the way that you’ve talked about controlling the Mexican border?

DT: Well, the Canadian border is a much, much longer border, and it just doesn’t seem that, and certainly you can have problems up there, and I know one of our brilliant candidates said let’s build a wall on the Canadian border. I actually thought he was joking when he said that, but I guess he wasn’t, and maybe that’s why he’s not in the race anymore. But we have to just, we need vigilance all over. Let’s face it, we need vigilance all over. We have to have people watching all over. On the Southern border, I think we have, I definitely feel we have to have a wall, and we can have, and walls do work, by the way. Walls do work. But on the Southern border, we need a wall.

HH: All right, now I ask you every time I see you in person at the debate or on the phone if your military/national security team is ready to be rolled out, yet. Have you gotten close to rolling it out, yet?

DT: Well, I’ve had meetings with people, and I felt very strongly about, you know, that whole subject for a long period of time, long before this, long before this run. I’ve felt very, very strongly about it. I think there’s nothing more important. And you know, another thing that people don’t ever bring up, and they literally never bring it up, I bring it up all the time, is the way our vets are being treated, because they are being treated horribly. I’m seeing more, and you know, I get to see, on the trail, I now go on the campaign trail. I would have never thought I would have said that, because I’ve been a politician for three months now. But on the trail, I meet so many vets, and they are being devastated by what’s going on at the Veterans Administration. It’s incredible, but I do have a great group of people, and at the right time, I’m going to roll them out. I think you’ll be impressed. I think even you will be impressed, Hugh.

HH: Is there a Kissinger among them? Is there a Zbieg among them? Someone who is going to stand out and really guide the Trump worldview?

DT: I think there are people that are highly-respected. I don’t want to use, you know, necessarily the names that you just used, but I think they’re people that are highly-respected, and people that when they hear the names, people will be impressed, people that know, like yourself, will be impressed.

HH: Now I’ve talked to you before about military spending, and you’ve assured this audience you are going to be very robust in spending money. The F-35 is the aircraft of the future. It’s already $160 billion dollars over budget. We were supposed to sell 3,100 of them to our allies and to ourselves, and Canada’s going to drop its order now. A program like this, are you down into the weeds, yet, on the F-35 or the Ohio-class replacement? Or are you going to let other people brief you up on that as you get closer to the White House?

DT: Well, I do what briefings, but I do hear that it’s not very good. I’m hearing that our existing planes are better. And one of the pilots came out of the plane, one of the test pilots, and said this isn’t as good as what we already have. And to spend billions and billions of dollars on something that maybe isn’t as good, but, and I don’t know if you’ve heard that. Have you been hearing that also?

HH: Well, there are big problems with the F-35, yes, absolutely.

DT: Yeah, well, I mean, big problems. They’re saying it doesn’t perform as well as our existing equipment, which is much less expensive. So when I hear that, immediately I say we have to do something, because you know, they’re spending billions. This is a plane. There’s never been anything like it in terms of cost. And how about, you know, we’re retooling with planes that aren’t as good as the ones we have, and the test pilots are amazing people. They know better than anybody, okay, and I think you would accept that.

HH: Yes.

DT: When they say that this cannot perform as well, as the planes we already have, what are doing, and spending so much more money?

HH: All right, now I’m close to the end of my time, and I always get hit by my audience for not asking you any fun questions, so here’s some fun questions. Do you watch college football?

DT: I do.

HH: Who do you cheer for other than The Ohio State University Buckeyes?

DT: Well, I do, I have a lot of respect, I have a lot of respect for that coach, wouldn’t you think? I mean, look what happens every place he goes. I used to think it was his great quarterback in Florida that caused all of this, but I mean, here he has three quarterbacks last year and he did so well. So I do have great respect for that team. I certainly have respect for the Notre Dame program, you look at it. I find it amazing to watch different programs. You look at what happened to Texas, how bad that’s gone, and I look at, you know, things like that, too. I like to see the good, the bad, ugly. I like to see what’s happening. But you have some very interesting, you have some very interesting teams. I think Alabama is looking stronger and stronger.

HH: So by the way, is there…

DT: But with all of that being said, I don’t get to watch too much, because I am doing pretty much what you and I talk 95% of the time about. But I do find it, I love all sports, actually.

HH: But you don’t, you don’t have, your heart is not sold to any club like mine is to the Buckeyes? You don’t have a number one affection?

DT: No, not to that extent. I like watching it. I watch it a little bit from afar. I don’t have a lot of time to watch it, but I certainly enjoy it.

HH: And if you’re president, will you fill out the NCAA brackets like President Obama has made a habit of doing every year? Or do you think that’s a silly exercise of time?

DT: I’d rather spend my time doing other things. I think it’s fine that he does it, but you know, honestly, I’d rather spend my time, we’ve got a lot of problems. We’ve got $19 trillion in debt. We have our horrible, that terrible deal, one of the most incompetent deals of any kind that I’ve seen with Iran. We have so many problems in this country, I’d really rather, I have no objection to him doing it. He wants to play games. But I’d really rather spend my time doing more important things.

HH: Now you do play a lot of golf, though, don’t you?

DT: I used to. I haven’t been very much. I used to play a lot of golf. I mean, a lot of golf, I’d play once a week or twice a week. I own some of the greatest clubs in the world. I own Doral, the Blue Monster. I own Turnberry in Scotland, home of the British Open.

HH: Oh, I know. I’ve got…

DT: One of the greatest places in the world, but I don’t get to use it.

HH: I’ve got a Donald Trump IOU for Turnberry. I get to play Turnberry. But what’s your handicap?

DT: Well, I’ve worn a lot of club championships, and I would say that now, it would be four, because I’m a good golfer.

HH: Oh, gosh.

DT: I would say four, but I’ve worn many club championships where you have to beat scratch golfers. So I’ve been a good golfer…

HH: You know, you’re not going to win a lot of votes if you go out and tell people you’re a four handicap. Everybody above four is not going to like you.

DT: I know. No, well, I haven’t been playing very much, but I think I’d be okay at four. But I haven’t been playing very much. I would say now, I’m averaging one round every two and a half weeks. Can you believe that? Two and a half, three weeks. That’s terrible.

HH: That’s terrible.

DT: But you know, I’m all over the place. And honestly, it’s so exciting what I’m going. I’m having such a good time doing it that I’m not thinking in terms of golf. Does that make sense to you?

HH: It does.

DT: It’s just like too exciting.

HH: My last question has to do with your access in the media. You let Mark Leibovich, who is one of the world’s great writers, come fly with you on Trump One back and forth across the country. And Mark is a friend of this program, he’s a friend of mine. He’s a great writer. Are you doing a lot of that? Are you saying come on in, people, and follow me around, you’ll get the real Trump?

DT: I don’t really, you know, mind. I did, I liked Mark. He’s a nice guy. I was disappointed in the cover. It’s a cover in the New York Times magazine, and they put, like, I don’t know, they had some artwork. And inside, they had one of the best pictures I’ve ever seen of myself. I loved the picture, but it wasn’t on the cover. So anyway, they didn’t put the kind of picture that you would normally, it was a cover story, actually, but they didn’t use the good picture. I think Mark’s a terrific guy, actually, and I do open it up to people. And I think you have to, I think you have an obligation. You’re running for office, you have to open it up. But I’m on the cover of so many magazines. I’m on the cover of the Forbes 400. I’m on the cover of Time Magazine. I’m on the cover of People Magazine. I’m just looking at my desk. I have covers all over the place. So…

HH: So these are the last two questions. Do you think Hillary will ever allow that kind of access to her that you gave to Leibovich? Or does she have too much to hide?

DT: I don’t think she will, unless it’s to a very friendly person.

HH: And then finally, a lot of people like you because your kids are all great.

DT: Right.

HH: And they opened up in People. And of your kids, have any of them caused you problems or angst? Or have you just hit the golden win streak here?

DT: No, I think, you know, there are certain problems, but nothing like, you know, I have friends that have tremendous problems with their children, and I see what they go through, and it’s a very sad thing with drugs and different things. And they haven’t caused me that kind of problems. They’ve been very good, and they’ve been good students. They’ve gone to good schools, and they’ve bene very good students, so I’m proud of them. And now the three older ones are in the business with me, Ivanka, Don and Eric, and we’re very proud of the job they’re doing. So I really think, certainly little chugs along the way, but overall, I’m very happy with them. I’m very proud of them.

HH: And they like the campaign life? They like being out there with dad on the…

DT: They enjoy it. They love seeing what’s happening. I mean, you know, in Jacksonville…

HH: Oh, interesting….

DT: I think we’re going to have 15,000 people on Saturday night, 15,000, and it could be much more than that. But I mean, when I say 15, I like to use the lower numbers so that we can always, but I think we’re probably talking about 15,000 people, and Doral, in Florida, which is tomorrow night, we’re going to have thousands of people.

HH: Have a great trip. I’ve overstayed my time. Tell Hope I’m sorry, and I’ll talk to you next time, Donald Trump.

DT: Don’t worry, I look forward to it. Thank you very much, Hugh.

HH: Thank you, be well.

DT: So long.

End of interview.

,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.

,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.

Elecciones en noviembre, 2016

LAZARO R GONZALEZ

Para Alcalde del Condado Miami Dade

Escriba el nombre de Lázaro R González en

el espacio de la boleta electoral en blanco

Si quiere que se acabe el relajo, el robo, el descaro, la mala administración y que el gobierno le responda a usted y no que sea un feudo de los políticos inescrupulosos, no permita más abusos envie nuestros mensajes a sus amigos y conocidos.

Recuerde que “NO Deseamos Donaciones de Dinero”

LazaroRGonzalez@gmail.com LazaroRGonzalez@hotmail.com

 

Algunas de las cosas mal hechas, estupideces,  derroche de dinero público del actual alcalde y los anteriores. Esto tiene que terminar. Yo me comprometo a acabar con todo lo mal hecho en los desgobiernos anteriores. Lázaro R González

 

El problema de los gastos del gobierno condal en Miami es de primera atención. Los salarios de los empleados del condado tienen elevados salarios y pensiones de retiros. Por ejemplo cuando el alcalde actual deje de serlo entonces recibirá una pensión de $150,000. Creo que estamos manteniendo demasiadas personas cobrando demasiado en salarios y pensiones. El 60% de los ingresos del condado se gastan en pensiones a los retirados.  ¿?

En el condado funcionan bien muy pocas cosas. Existen 50,000 personas que están esperando en la lista del programa Plan 8. Varios edificios que están semi abandonados y que se están cayendo a pedazos fabricados y carecen de los estacionamientos. “Ahora mismo hay uno en West Kendall que los construyeron pero esta vacío porque tienes que dar casi $4,000 dólares para poder vivir ahí y las personas que fueron e hicieron la cola no tienen los $4,000 dólares”. “El alcalde Giménez en los últimos dos años se ha enfocado en lo que se llama “Workforce Housing” el ha dado propiedades de Miami Dade, terrenos de Miami Dade para construir casas que se están ofreciendo a $170 mil dólares y esas casas no se le están vendiendo a las personas que están en listas de espera y no tiene un proceso aprobado por el departamento de vivienda a nivel de Washington”, ahora están hablando de gastarse más de $70 millones de dólares en el proyecto Liberty Squere. Hay una crisis en el departamento de viviendas de Miami Dade. Actualizar la lista de las personas que esperan por vivienda sería un buen paso para comenzar a reparar el daño,  el sistema de computadoras que tiene el condado, señalando “que es anticuado”. “Hace aproximadamente 6 meses el gobierno federal encontró que el departamento de viviendas públicas de Miami Dade, había dado más de $2 millones de dólares erróneamente a compañías que no cumplieron con el requisito federal, y que decidió Carlos Giménez “pues Giménez decidió pagar la multa, no con el dinero que tenemos ahora, sino con el dinero que vamos a recibir para las viviendas en dos años”. De acuerdo con el alcalde Giménez, “en Washington no hay dinero y que el estado no le quiere dar dinero al condado Miami Dade”. Entre las cosas que el actual Alcalde prosiguió dando apoyo a los Tolls que se han apoderado de las carreteras locales que fueron construidas con el dinero de los ciudadanos de Miami. No solo le da apoyo al MDX si no que para colmo del desparpajo no solo quiere ser de nuevo alcalde del condado sino que también quiere que lo nombren presidente del MDX. QUE DIOS NOS COJA CONFESADOS. Si ahora los miembros del MDX tienen salarios de más de 100,000 dólares. Si es así para mí esto es un abuso y un descaro. La historia de Giménez en eso de sacarles dinero a los ciudadanos es en lo que él es mejor.                                                            Hace unos cuantos meses se nos pidió nada más que 30,000 millones de dólares para reparar el sistema del alcantarillado de Miami y yo por lo menos no he visto hacer un hueco para reparar ningún alcantarillado todavía pero el dinero ya si está ahí sacándonos en formas de taxes adelantados para gastarlo. ¿Qué paso donde está el dinero cuando van a empezar a reparar el bendito y multi-millonario del alcantarillado de oro de Miami? ¿A dónde fue a parar todo el dinero que nos cobran por servirnos el agua y los impuestos que cobran para mantener los alcantarillados? ¿Qué paso se esfumo ese dinero. Donde están hechas las alcantarillas nuevas?                                                                           

También nos pidieron los intocables de la Comision de Educacion  al el pueblo de Miami aprobó que se le dieran creo que $12,000’000,000.00 Doce mil Millones de dólares para el Departamento de Educación para reparar las escuelas. También me pregunto a donde se fue todos los millones que recaudan de impuestos a los ciudadanos todos los años La comisión de Educacion. Yo personalmente no he visto ni siquiera un persona con una brocha pintando una escuela o cogiendo una gotera en los techos. Señores son $12,000 Millones… $12,000 Millones.

Giménez no hablo nada mas de los autos de la policía que recientemente se encontraron un edificio de parqueo con cientos o miles de carros para el condado o la policía, supuestamente destinados a la policía, que se estaban pudriendo en un parque porque nadie los uso. La prensa formo el escándalo y todo el mundo se disgustó y protesto. Pero nada paso. Quién es el culpable de que esto ocurriera.  A quien despidieron? ¿A quién han puesto en la cárcel? Algunos han dicho que los escándalos estos se desatan por la prensa y luego se callan porque el dinero corre por debajo de los tapetes y todos se callan. Tampoco Gimenes no hablo nada del el Jefe de la policía de Miami apareció muerto dicen que suicidado,  primero dijeron que había sido asesinado, y después entonces lo suicidaron y de pronto la prensa no hablo más del asunto y todo el mundo se quedó esperando si se murió o lo murieron.  Y aquí paz y en el cielo gloria: Sun Centinel. Tuesday Oct. 6, 2015.  Otro de los problemas más acuciantes es la locura del incremento de los taxes de la propiedad. En esto hay algo que es repugnante porque ellos han dicho que no han subido los impuestos, gracias al buen trabajo del alcalde y el que está a cargo de los taxes. Yo pienso que lo que hay es una falta de respeto a la inteligencia de los ciudadanos porque SI SE SUBIEROSN LOS TAXES. El amillaramiento que es el valor de los taxes que se le graban a usted lo fijaron creo que alrededor de un 1 % O sea que si se pusieron impuestos pero no solo eso sino que Los taxes que ustedes pagan están tasados sobre el valor de su propiedad y EL VALOR DE LA PROPIEDAD SI FUE ELEVADO “Y MUCHO ESTE ANO” ALGO QUE LO HACEN TODOS LOS ANOS. Así que eso de decir que los taxes no fueron aumentados, es mentira… Comparen lo que pagan este 2015 con lo que pagaron en el 2014 y vean si les cobran más o no.

Yo creo que en el condado hay demasiadas personas “Trabajando” y Cobrando muchísimos más dinero que los que normalmente ganan los ciudadanos que no trabajan en el condado. ¿Por Qué?  Porque es muy fácil gastar el dinero de los ciudadanos que tontamente se dejan quitar el dinero en taxes y toles, por los políticos. Tenemos 5 nuevos vice alcaldes. Unas posiciones que nunca habían existido en el Condado Miami. Solo teníamos un administrador y ya!!! Que invento es ese. ¿Es que los Virreyes son amigos del alcalde y los acomodo?

Sabían ustedes que el hijo del alcalde es uno de los CABILDEROS más influyentes en el Condado Miami en que su papa es el alcalde. Dice un vecino mío que todo queda en casa. Es legal que el hijo de un alcalde sea cabildero donde su papa es el que “ordena y manda”.

El crimen es altísimo en Miami, Yo creo que es más alto que en toda la historia de Miami. Los noticieros de la televisión todos los días llenan los espacios de noticias  “Sangrientas” de asesinatos y todos los días es así. Los casos de tráfico de drogas son cada vez más populares y más dañinos y terribles. ¿Que pasa la policía está de vacaciones permanente?  El transito es un verdadero infierno para que las personas usen las carreteras. Los accidentes son el pan nuestro de cada día. Las autopistas son sucursales de las funerarias y los Hospitales. Las calles están más atiborradas de autos y cada día hay más accidentes, las calles son francamente sucursales de un manicomio de primera clase. Y que hace el gobierno (Nada) Dicen en la TV que el tiempo de la luz amarilla le han quitado tiempo para poder ponerle un ticket a los que doblan a la derecha en los semáforos y eso ha creado accidentes. .

En Hialeah se ha terminado hace más de un año una purificadora de agua y nadie se ha podido tomar todavía un vaso de agua porque no sirve lo que purifica. Quien estuvo a cargo de esto, cuando van a meter a un político en la cárcel y le van a quitar todo lo que se robó. Pero no aquí no pasa nada. En varas de las ciudades del condado se están poniendo a políticos a disposición de la policía. (Espero que la policía haga algo) Con respeto lo único que hace la policía es levantar el acta y mandarle a los que han sido saqueando una copia del acta y ya!

Tenemos una fuente de saqueo a los ciudadanos de Miami y de todo el estado de la Florida que es la que es La lotería de La Florida, donde nadie sabe quién es el que se gana el premio. Alguien me puede decir porque solamente aquí hay tres lugares en que se juega: Los Micosuky, Los Perros y El hipódromo de Hialeah. Porque estas tres entidades son los UNICOS que tienen derecho a expoliar a los jugadores. Estas entidades que yo sepa no contribuyen a nada en el Condado. Porque no se aprobó un casino ahí en donde estaba El Herald. POR QUE???? Porque unos si y otros no. Nosotros podemos tener un sistema como el de las Vegas y es más, mucho mejor. Podemos invitar a La mujer del Raton Mike de Orlando, a que su esposa se bañe en tanguita en la playa mientrasMike juega en un casino como los de Las Vegas y que tengan que dejar impuestos en Miami y así disminuir los abusivos taxes del gobierno condal de Miami. Que alguien me diga porque esto no se puede hacer. De todas maneras nos están saqueando con la Lotería de La Florida, donde nunca se quién se la saca. Mientras que en todos los mercados de Miami y gasolineras etc. Te venden los tickes de la Lotería Saqueadora de los bolsillos de los trabajadores.

Nadie me puede justificar porque aquí se cobran todos esos taxes, tolls y otros cobros que son muchísimos, tan exagerados y asfixiantes de los ciudadanos del Condado Miami porque con los miles de millones que genera el Puerto de Miami y los otros miles de millones que genera el aeropuerto de Miami. Estos dos solos Generan dinero más que suficiente para mantener las calles de Miami pavimentadas con Plata Mejicana. En que se gasta ese dineral?  Porque no se presentan en público todo el dinero que generan estas dos entidades y en que se malgastan. Eso es si tocar todos los muchos generadores de dinero al condado.

El transporte de pasajeros en Miami es una porquería, las guaguas están sucias vienen cuando les da la gana y casi siempre vienen atrasadas y medio bacías. Porque el pueblo no las usa. PORQUE SON INEFICIENTES E INSUFUCIENTES PARA TODO EL QUE DESEARIA USARLAS. El un dinero que se derrocha y que no resuelve ningún problema. Se debe vender todo este sistema de trasporte a particulares y que ellos que si saben transportar personas sea las que se ocupen de resolver el problema. Ademas toda esa GIGANTESCA NOMINA DE TRABAJADORES DEL TRANSPORTE Se eliminaría de cuajo y ellos pasarían a trabajar en la empresa privada como debe ser. Ustedes se recuerdan cuando algunos particulares pusieron guaguas a dar servicio por donde los Miaminses necesitavan ir y aquiello se hizo muy popular. Creo que le decían “La Conchita” Lo que p[asa que como siempre el gobierno es inepto y eso tiene que cambiar.

Nosotros tenemos el mejor lugar del MUNDO para vacacionar, playas, restaurantes, podemos hacer casinos, cabaret’s y Parques temáticos, Tenemos los moles más bonitos y mejor surtidos del mundo. Pero no hacemos nada porque estamos rodeados de enanos anormales que son electos. Y el pueblo duerme el “Sueño eterno” ¿Y nadie despierta? Parece mentira que la industria permite al gobierno manteniendo a Miami como una aldea retrograda.

Porque no se ha invitado y se les da facilidades a las grandes corporaciones de producción de películas de Hollywood a que vengan aquí a hacer películas y que establezcan estudios aquí. Las Películas de playas no podrán ser mejores que aquí porque el frio del agua de California le pone los pelos de punta a cualquiera que se meta en el agua. Aquí el agua es carentica y las playas no puedes ser más bellas.

Los noticieros de la TV y Los periódicos  diariamente están llenos de cadáveres (Parecen cementerios todos los días) porque los accidentes. La ciudad es un expendido de drogas de todos los colores y sabores.   Y la policía bien gracias. Los Miembros de los algunos gobiernos de los diferentes municipios terminan en las cárceles porque son unos delincuentes, Las oficinas de los gobiernos es una extensión de la familia de los Alcaldes y otros funcionarios.  Otros terminan en manos de la policía porque hacen cosas locas en Motos o automóviles borrachos conduciendo a mucha más de la velocidad permitida. Otros se dedican a robar los bienes de los ciudadanos. Tenemos una falta de moral, decencia y legalidad. Pudiera estar escribiendo cientos de páginas más de miserias y violaciones y burlas a los ciudadanos por los gobernantes. Yo siempre he estado esperando que el pueblo de Miami  forme un “motín” como el que ocurrió en el pequeño pueblo de Bell en California, donde el pueblo tomo la alcandía y llevo hasta la cárcel a patadas por los fondillos a los comisionados y al alcalde donde todavía están ahí por ladrones y descarados.

Quieren vivir en un lugar decente, donde no malgasten su dinero ni le cobren taxes donde el dinero no se usa para el bienestar de los ciudadanos y la comunidad  y vivir con tranquilidad y legalidad. Yo soy la persona que quiero y lo puede hacer que eso sea una realidad. Si ustedes me apoyan estoy dispuesto hacerlo. Los que quieren votar por mi endrán que hacerlo en la boleta en blanco. No habrá propaganda en TV o periódicos ni pasquines. No recogeremos dinero para campaña, ni para nada. Lo que podemos haremos es poner los anuncios en mi sitio Web y en mi página “En mi opinión” Ustedes pueden copiar mis mensajes y ponerlos en sus sitio web y en Facebook. Coméntenlo con sus amigos y familiares. Así es que le vamos a ganar a los que no se merecen ser sus representantes en el gobierno.

Lázaro R González Miño

Candidato a Alcalde de Miami Dade Elecciones del 2016 lazarorgonzalez@gmail.com

 “FREEDOM IS NOT FREE”

“En mi opinión”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s