Story 1: Trump Efforts Save American Jobs At Carrier — Good Optics and Great Speech — Does Not Address Out-of-Control Federal Government Spending And The Impact on Economic Growth and Job Creation — Videos
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
~ Ghandi
Big win for Donald Trump
MUST WATCH: First MAJOR Donald Trump Speech Since Winning Election – Carrier Victory Lap in Indiana
The Untruth About Steve Bannon | Donald Trump’s Chief Strategist
Best Steve Bannon Speech
BU Econ. Professor Kotlikoff: America is Bankrupt
Rhett Talks – Is the United States Bankrupt?
LISTEN to THIS.. TRUMP is RIGHT on US DEBT. (Pre-General election)
US hides real debt, in worse shape than Greece’
Published on Feb 9, 2013
The US national debt is twenty times higher than is officially reported, approaching $222 trillion, and today’s children could soon be paying their parent’s debts, reputed American economist Laurence Kotlikoff told RT. TRANSCRIPT of the interview: http://on.rt.com/81u1ac
FairTax: Fire Up Our Economic Engine (Official HD)
Freedom from the IRS! – FairTax Explained in Detail
Deficits, Debts and Unfunded Liabilities: The Consequences of Excessive Government Spending
Uploaded on May 10, 2010
Huge budget deficits and record levels of national debt are getting a lot of attention, but this video explains that unfunded liabilities for entitlement programs are Americas real red-ink challenge. More important, this CF&P mini-documentary reveals that deficits and debt are symptoms of the real problem of an excessive burden of government spending. http://www.freedomandprosperity.org
Monetary and Fiscal Policy: Crash Course Government and Politics #48
Social Policy: Crash Course Government and Politics #49
Fiscal Policy and Stimulus: Crash Course Economics #8
Deficits & Debts: Crash Course Economics #9
Laurence Kotlikoff-U S Treasury Bonds One of the Riskiest Securities in the World
US Unfunded Liabilities
III – Unfunded Liabilities
Dr. Laurence Kotlikoff giving advice on Social Security
Full Speech: Donald Trump, Mike Pence Carrier Plant Announcement 12/1/2016 Trump Indianapolis Speech
Carrier says it has deal with Trump to keep jobs in Indiana
Published on Nov 30, 2016
Air conditioning company Carrier said Tuesday that it had reached an agreement with President-elect Donald Trump that would keep 1,000 jobs in Indianapolis.
Trump and Vice President-elect Mike Pence, Indiana’s outgoing governor, planned to travel to the state Thursday to unveil the agreement alongside company officials.
Details of the agreement were not immediately available. A Trump transition source told Fox News that Carrier executives went to Trump Tower Tuesday to hash out the deal.
Trump spent much of his campaign pledging to keep companies like Carrier from moving jobs overseas. His focus on manufacturing jobs contributed to his unexpected appeal with working-class voters in states like Michigan, which has long voted for Democrats in presidential elections.
In a September debate against Democratic rival Hillary Clinton, he railed against Carrier’s decision to move hundreds of air-conditioner manufacturing jobs from Indianapolis to Mexico.
“So many hundreds and hundreds of companies are doing this,” Trump said. “We have to stop our jobs from being stolen from us. We have to stop our companies from leaving the United States.”
In February, Carrier said it would shutter its Indianapolis plant employing 1,400 workers and move its manufacturing to Mexico.
The plant’s workers would have been laid off over three years starting in 2017.
United Technologies Electronic Controls also announced then that it planned to move its Huntington manufacturing operations to a new plant in Mexico, costing the northeastern Indiana city 700 jobs by 2018. Those workers make microprocessor-based controls for the HVAC and refrigeration industries.
Obama Admin Reacts To Pres-Elect Trump’s Deal With Carrier To Keep Jobs In Indiana – Cavuto
Trump Saves Some, But Not All, Carrier Jobs
Obama: Some jobs ‘are just not going to come back’
Trump, Pence Saved nearly 1,000 jobs from moving to Mexico
Carrier employee thanks President-elect Trump
Trump Saves American Factory…For A Price
Trump Convinces Carrier To Keep 1,000 Jobs In America
Megyn Kelly Panel Debates Trump Tactic Used to Save Carrier Jobs – 11/30/16
Trump proposes 35% tax for imported products from Mexico
Trump promises to save Carrier jobs
Published on Mar 1, 2016
Presidential candidate threatens 35% tax on Carrier’s products
Carrier Employee Mark Weddle, longtime democrat, “Voting For Trump”
Is Free Trade Destroying US Jobs? Demagoguery vs. Data
The Legacy of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act
Uploaded on Jun 17, 2011
The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act was a grave error for U.S. trade policy. As the United States slid into depression, the act represented a desperation move by Congress and President Hoover. Since then, presidents have regarded free trade as the rule rather than the exception. Economist Douglas A. irwin discusses the Smoot-Hawley Act and its legacy.
Milton Friedman on the Dangers of Protectionism (Obama’s recent tariff on Chinese imports)
Milton Friedman – Free Trade Vs Protectionism
Milton Friedman – Free Trade (Q&A) Part 1
Milton Friedman – Free Trade (Q&A) Part 2
Trump nominees map out plans for tax cuts, trade and Carrier-style negotiations
Employees walk in the Carrier plant parking lot on Wednesday in Indianapolis. Donald Trump persuaded the air-conditioning manufacturer not to move up to 1,000 jobs from Indiana to Mexico. (Darron Cummings/AP)
President-elect Donald Trump’s nascent administration on Wednesday began outlining the contours of its strategy for jump-starting the nation’s economy, including how it would overhaul the tax code, rethink trade agreements and directly negotiate with major corporations.
Treasury secretary nominee Steven Mnuchin rejected claims that Trump’s tax program would benefit mainly the wealthy, instead highlighting plans for a child-care tax credit and a middle-class tax cut.
“There will be no absolute tax cut for the upper class,” he said on CNBC. “There will be a big tax cut for the middle class.”
Trump’s strategy secured an early victory this week when the president-elect persuaded air-conditioning manufacturer Carrier not to move up to 1,000 jobs from Indiana to Mexico. The negotiation was an unusual move for a modern president, but Mnuchin suggested such direct intervention would be an important tool under the new administration.
“It starts with an attitude of this administration,” Mnuchin said Wednesday on CNBC. “This president, this vice president-elect is going to have open communications with business leaders.”
Mnuchin and Trump’s pick for commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, also called for moving away from the broad multinational free trade agreements that have shaped the global economy over the past generation in favor of bilateral deals. But they stopped short of embracing the president-elect’s most heated election rhetoric, calling for double-digit tariffs on imports from China and Mexico.
Turning Trump’s sweeping campaign promises into reality could prove a daunting challenge for his newly named economics team, which includes Todd Ricketts, co-owner of the Chicago Cubs, as deputy commerce secretary. Trump’s proposals are both expansive and aggressive, starting with a pledge to create 25 million jobs and push growth to 4 percent annually.
Many economists have questioned whether that is even possible in the face of an aging workforce and slower growth in productivity. In addition, rewriting the tax code would be a mammoth undertaking that has eluded Republican lawmakers since the 1980s, and independent analysts cast doubt on whether Trump can make the numbers add up.
On Wednesday, Trump’s new economic team said that overhauling taxes — particularly cutting the corporate tax rate — would create incentives for businesses to invest and hire more workers, eventually resulting in higher tax revenue. But an analysis by the independent Tax Foundation estimated that Trump’s plan would cost at least $2.6 trillion over the next decade, even after accounting for stronger growth.
Mnuchin and Ross reiterated the administration’s commitment to cutting taxes for the middle class, but that remains a key difference between the president-elect’s campaign plan and the tax blueprint put forth by GOP leaders on Capitol Hill.
The congressional plan, like Trump’s, would cut taxes for the wealthy and for corporations, but it would not do nearly as much as Trump would to cut taxes for lower- and middle-income Americans.
Reconciling the two will be a major sticking point in any tax-reform negotiations next year, although House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) praised Trump’s nominees on Wednesday.
Steven Mnuchin, a former Goldman Sachs banker and Hollywood financier, is President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for treasury secretary. He spoke at Trump Tower Nov. 30. (The Washington Post)
“I am excited to get to work with this strong team to fix our broken tax code, ease the regulatory burden on American businesses, and grow our economy,” he said.
Mnuchin also pushed back against analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center that found the bulk of the benefits under Trump’s plan would go to wealthy households, while some single-parent households would end up paying higher taxes.
“We’re going to have the most significant middle-income tax cut since Reagan,” he told reporters.
Business groups welcomed the focus on tax cuts and praised Trump’s nomination of Cabinet officials with industry backgrounds.
“They understand that modernizing our outdated, anticompetitive tax system will be the most effective way to produce the economic growth that puts more people to work in good jobs,” said John Engler, president of the Business Roundtable.
On trade, Mnuchin and Ross sounded a somewhat softer note than Trump did on the campaign trail. During the election, Trump called China the world’s “single greatest currency manipulator.” But on Wednesday, his top economic advisers demurred when asked whether they would take formal action against the country.
“If we determine that we need to label them as a currency manipulator, that’s something the Treasury would do,” Mnuchin said.
And though they expressed disapproval of sweeping multinational trade agreements in favor of bilateral deals with other countries, they backed away from threats to impose double-digit tariffs on imports from Mexico and China.
“Everybody talks about tariffs as the first things. Tariffs are the last thing. Tariffs are a part of the negotiation,” Ross said on CNBC. “The real trick is going to be increase American exports.”
Trump’s efforts to keep Carrier in Indiana underscore both the potential benefits and pitfalls of his hands-on approach. Under the agreement, the company will receive tax incentives from the state economic development corporation to keep about 1,000 jobs in the state, said John Mutz, a member of the agency’s board and the former lieutenant governor of Indiana.
“The dynamics of the situation changed,” Mutz said.
Mutz said he had not reviewed the final terms of the agreement and could not provide details about how much money the company would receive or over what period. If the agreement is only for a few years, Trump’s efforts might give workers only a temporary reprieve.
Experts said custom deals such as the one struck with Carrier could create a haphazard system in which the government winds up picking corporate winners and losers, said Timothy Bartik, an economist at the nonpartisan W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. Instead, he said, governments should focus on providing training for workers and investing in research and development to encourage businesses to invest and grow.
Economy & Business Alerts
Breaking news about economic and business issues.
“The trouble with striking just individual deals is that means that some people are subject to different rules,” Bartik said. “If you think of things as deals, who gets the deals? Does it become a system of favoritism?”
Although the agreement was celebrated as a win in the United States, officials in Mexico faced growing uncertainty.
Carrier had already begun building a new factory in the outskirts of the city of Monterrey, although company officials would not say whether any of the 2,000 employees originally projected to staff it had been hired. Paulo Carreño, a deputy foreign minister in charge of North American relations, said that every company on both sides of the border “has full liberty to decide where to put their own business.”
“What we have created with the U.S. and Canada is we not only buy and sell things with one another, we build things together,” he said. “We need to not only keep this relationship but to deepen it.”
Jim Tankersley and Josh Partlow contributed to this report.
Indiana Gives $7 Million in Tax Breaks to Keep Carrier Jobs
The move will keep about 1,000 jobs in the state; Trump says companies won’t leave the U.S. ‘without consequences’
The Carrier Corp. plant in Indianapolis.PHOTO: ASSOCIATED PRESS
By TED MANN Updated Dec. 1, 2016 3:26 p.m. ET
Indiana officials agreed to give United Technologies Corp. $7 million worth of tax breaks over 10 years to encourage the company’s Carrier Corp. unit to keep about 1,000 jobs in the state, according to people familiar with the matter, a deal struck after intense criticism of Carrier by President-elect Donald Trump on the campaign trail.
The heating and air conditioning company will invest about $16 million to keep its operations in the state, including a furnace plant in Indianapolis that it had previously planned to close and shift the work to Mexico, the people said.
Mr. Trump, who toured the Carrier plant in Indianapolis Thursday with Vice President-elect Mike Pence, said companies aren’t going to leave the U.S. “anymore without consequences.”
After publicly shaming Carrier Corp. throughout the presidential campaign, Donald Trump announced a deal on Thursday with the company’s parent to keep 1,000 jobs in Indiana in exchange for state tax breaks. Is this model repeatable with other companies? WSJ’s Jason Bellini has #TheShortAnswer. Photo: Getty
The deal would cover 800 Carrier workers from the Indianapolis furnace plant and an additional 300 research and headquarters positions that weren’t slated to go to Mexico, according to another person briefed on the deal.
The company still plans to move 600 jobs from the Carrier plant to Mexico. It also will proceed with plans to close a second plant in Huntington, Ind., that makes electronic controls, moving 700 other jobs to Mexico.
Carrier has previously said it expected to save about $65 million a year by shutting the plant and shifting its operations to Monterrey, in the state of Nuevo León, where wages average about $11 a day, plus benefits. The average wage of the Indiana jobs that will be retained is $30 an hour, according to a document reviewed by the Journal.
Mr. Trump has played up the partial rescue as a sign he can deliver on campaign promises. Through the presidential primary and general election, the Republican businessman had made an example of Carrier, at one point threatening to put a 35% tariff on Carrier imports unless it reversed its decision to move the jobs to Mexico.
“This is a big win for the incoming administration but an even bigger win for the people of Indiana,” transition spokesmanJason Miller said Thursday. The transition team has declined to provide details about the cost of keeping those jobs in the state.
Mr. Trump also will host an evening rally at U.S. Bank Arena in Cincinnati, a Republican stronghold. Ohio was one of six states the Republican captured after being won twice by Democratic President Barack Obama. That is the start of a broader “thank you” tour that is expected to include stops in Florida and across the Midwest.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, who during his presidential campaign had also attacked Carrier and other firms shifting work abroad, criticized the deal on Thursday, saying Mr. Trump failed to make good on his campaign pledge to save all of the jobs from moving to Mexico.
The deal also creates a bad precedent, Mr. Sanders contended, writing that Mr. Trump “has signaled to every corporation in America that they can threaten to offshore jobs in exchange for business-friendly tax benefits and incentives.”
“I’m pretty happy that we’re keeping jobs in America, aren’t you?” House Speaker Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) said Thursday. He said he didn’t know the details of the agreement, but that governors’ responsibilities include working to keep jobs in their states. “Mike Pence is still the sitting governor of Indiana. This is what governors do,” said Mr. Ryan.
The deal that emerged from weeks of negotiations between United Technologies brass and officials in the Trump camp led by Mr. Pence, the Indiana governor, is a relatively standard package of state incentives, according to people familiar with the agreement.
On Wednesday, Carrier said “incentives offered by the state were an important consideration,” without providing further details.
“This agreement in no way diminishes our belief in the benefits of free trade and that the forces of globalization will continue to require solutions for the long-term competitiveness of the U.S. and of American workers moving forward,” the company said.
In addition to Carrier, United Technologies makes Pratt & Whitney jet engines and Otis elevators. It employs about 200,000 people, about one third of them in the U.S.
People familiar with the negotiations said the company and Mr. Pence’s team also discussed a wide range of priorities, including United Technologies’ interest in a corporate tax overhaul, and regulations the company feels have been a burden to its business.
The federal government is also an important customer. The U.S. military accounts for about 10% of United Technologies’ $56 billion in annual sales, for products like the engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Finance Committee, said he would be asking more about the Carrier deal and said he would inquire whether there were promises about defense contracts.
“I want to know whether the president-elect promised special federal tax breaks for a single company,” Mr. Wyden said Thursday. “I want to do everything I can to keep jobs in the United States, but there are some questions here.”
For Mr. Trump, the trips to Indiana and Ohio meant there were no announced meetings on Thursday with prospective cabinet members. Those meetings will resume on Friday in New York, where Mr. Trump is scheduled to visit with Sen. David Perdue (R., Ga.), retired Adm. Jay Cohen, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton, and Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D., N.D.).
—Michael C. Bender and Richard Rubin contributed to this article.
Deal for Carrier to Keep U.S. Plant Open May Hinge on Tax Overhaul
Talks include the conglomerate’s plans to shift more than 2,000 jobs from Indiana to Mexico
By TED MANN
Nov. 27, 2016 6:32 p.m. ET
President-elect Donald Trump’s campaign pledge to save jobs at a Carrier plant in Indiana was framed around free trade, but negotiations about corporate tax law changes could be just as important to any possible deal.
Representatives for the incoming administration, including Vice President-elect Mike Pence, have held wide-ranging policy talks with top-ranking executives at Carrier’s parent company, United Technologies Corp., said a person familiar with the discussions.
The discussions include the conglomerate’s plans to shift more than 2,000 jobs from Indiana to Mexico, but have covered other issues, including the company’s wishes for a tax overhaul that Mr. Trump and Republicans have promised to pursue early in his administration, this person said.
United Technologies CEO Gregory Hayes has pledged to work with the new administration despite Mr. Trump’s attacks on the planned Carrier plant closure during his campaign. It wasn’t clear what role Mr. Trump himself has played in the discussions, though he said in a tweet on Thanksgivng he was working on the matter.
A spokeswoman for Mr. Trump didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
The incoming president’s goal is to show that he can keep some of his boldest campaign promises, and the CEO needs to keep peace with the federal government, a critical customer for products like its jet fighter engines. Military sales account for roughly 10% of the company’s $56 billion annual total, the company says.
United Technologies, like other globalized U.S. companies, also has large reserves of cash overseas—profits that corporations are waiting to repatriate to the U.S. until Congress cuts the level of tax they would pay. The company reported that 85% of its total cash, or more than $6 billion, was overseas, as of the end of 2015.
One idea backed by House Republicans but not Mr. Trump would be to create a two-tiered tax rate that would help companies that have used foreign profits for factories and other assets they can’t easily repatriate.
Large U.S. companies also want a lower corporate tax rate.
Given the variables of the company’s interests and the three-year window over which United Technologies planned to stagger the job cuts in Indiana, there is the potential for a deal, the person familiar with the discussions said.
In April, at a rally near Carrier’s Indianapolis plant, Mr. Trump pledged to impose a 35% tariff on air conditioning units the company built in Mexico for sale in the U.S.
Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders said Saturday that Mr. Trump must make it clear that if United Technologies “wants to receive another defense contract from the taxpayers of this country, it must not move these plants to Mexico.”
Though only a portion of overall sales at United Technologies—which makes Pratt & Whitney jet engines, Otis elevators and an array of building equipment—defense is a key focus of the conglomerate. The company is the sole provider of jet engines for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
Carrier said on Thanksgiving Day that it didn’t have any changes to announce, roughly an hour after Mr. Trump tweeted that he was “making progress” in convincing the company to keep the jobs in Indiana.
In Indianapolis, Mr. Trump’s message engendered only muted optimism.
“For us, we pretty much think it’s a done deal that they’re moving, and don’t think he can do anything to change that, although we don’t want to give up hope,” said Kelly Ray Hugunin,business representative for United Steelworkers Local 1999, which represents 1,400 workers at a Carrier plant that makes residential furnace equipment.
The union hasn’t received any word from the company or the Trump administration about any talks to prevent jobs moving to Mexico, said the union local’s president, Chuck Jones.
“If Trump’s got a trump card to play on this,” Mr. Jones said Saturday, “even though Carrier’s saving $65 million a year [by closing the plants], it’s that he would try to leverage some of the billions of dollars that United Technologies has on military contracts.”
FLASHBACK: OBAMA MOCKS TRUMP FOR PROMISING TO KEEP CARRIER PLANT IN U.S.
‘Those jobs of the past are just not going to come back’
June, President Obama participated in a PBS townhall and was asked about Trump’s promise to keep Carrier’s Indiana plant in the U.S. The townhall participant, a member of the Steelworkers Union employed by Carrier, asked Obama if anything could be done to stem the tide of jobs flowing out of the country, as Trump had recently promised to do.
“Those jobs of the past are just not going to come back,” Obama told the employee.
Instead, Obama advised workers losing their jobs to learn how to adapt their skills to “some of these new technologies,” in particular the “clean energy sector.”
“Let’s focus on those,” he suggested.
Obama also singled out Trump for derision, saying:
When somebody says, like the person you just mentioned who I’m not going to advertise for, that he’s going to bring all these jobs back, well how exactly are you going to do that? What are you going to do? There’s — there’s no answer to it. He just says, “Well, I’m going to negotiate a better deal.” Well, how — what — how exactly are you going to negotiate that? What magic wand do you have? And usually, the answer is he doesn’t have an answer.
“History shows that trade made easy, affordable and fast…always begets more trade, more jobs, more prosperity,” the founder and CEO of FedEx wrote in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed.
Who’s right? Take a look at what has happened to blue-collar workers.
Manufacturing jobs in the U.S. actually increased in the years after the North America Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada went into effect in 1994.
But the story changed dramatically in 2000. Since then, the U.S. has shed 5 million manufacturing jobs, a fact opponents of free trade mention often.
Over 12 million Americans still work in manufacturing
Trump and Bernie Sanders blame China for undercutting American workers with cheap labor (even Trump makes a lot of his suits and ties overseas). But there’s another big factor: technology. Robots and machines are also replacing workers. The tech trend would have happened regardless of trade.
Still, manufacturing remains a key part of the U.S. economy. Over 12.3 million Americans are employed in the industry. But it’s not the powerhouse it was.
In 1960, about one in four American workers had a job in manufacturing. Today fewer than one in 10 are employed in the sector, according to government data.
Call it the Great Shift. Workers transitioned from the fields to the factories. Now they are moving from factories to service counters and health care centers. The fastest growing jobs in America now are nurses, personal care aides, cooks, waiters, retail salespersons and operations managers.
Trump’s trade talk is ‘bluster’
Trade likely sped up the shift, but many experts say it was inevitable. It’s unlikely many manufacturing jobs will ever return, even if Trump’s walls get built.
“Trump’s talk on trade is bluster,” says economist Charles Ballard of Michigan State University. “Even if you did [what Trump says], you wouldn’t reverse the technology, which is a very big part of the picture.”
Trump’s threat to put hefty taxes on Chinese and Mexican goods coming into the country would likely to sink the economy into a recession. It would make many items at the store more expensive for working class Americans and spark a global trade war.
The U.S. tried this tactic in the 1930s with a law known as Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act. It backfired, pulling the U.S. further into the Great Depression.
The deeper question is whether the 5 million manufacturing positions that have been lost were truly that great. To put it another way, were the jobs lost really better than the jobs that have replaced them?
Since the 1960s, manufacturing has always paid substantially more than the minimum wage. Even today, the manufacturing jobs that remain average $20.17 an hour. That’s nearly three times the federal minimum wage.
It’s enough to vault a worker solidly into the lower middle class, although he or she still would earn less than the true middle — $53,657 a year.
Mention “blue collar,” and most Americans visualize an auto worker. Someone who is middle class with a good salary and benefits despite not having a college degree.
But the reality is manufacturing in America is (and always has) included a wide variety of positions. They range from clothing workers who make less than $25,000 a year on average to supervisors and plant operators who typically make almost $60,000 a year.
The jobs former manufacturing workers have moved into — health care, construction and retail — also vary greatly in pay, benefits and quality.
“Certain industries have declined and others have risen,” says Harvard professor and trade expert Robert Lawrence. “In aggregate, the economy is close to full employment.”
–CNNMoney’s Patrick Gillespie contributed to this report.
Story 2: U.S. Border Patrol Agents Assaults Up 200% From Last Year — Will Trump Rollback The 30-50 Million Illegal Aliens Invasion of The United States or Give 95% Plus Of The Illegal Aliens Citizenship? — Trump Will Give Them Citizenship — Touch Back Amnesty! — All The Illegal Aliens In The United States Are Criminal Illegal Aliens Mr. Trump! — Once This Happens — His Supporters Will Abandon Republican Party and Dump Trump! — Videos
“You can fool all the people some of the time, and
some of the people all the time,
but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Donald Trump’s Immigration Plan – Deport and then Mass Expedited Amnesty
Trump’s Touchback amnesty explained by Marc Thiessen
Rep Steve King discusses Trump’s touchback amnesty
‘Amnesty Trump’?: McCain Warns Donald of Softening Immigration Stance
How Donald Trump’s Amnesty Plan Works
The Illegal Invasion of America
Trump’s first 100 days: Immigration
Donald Trump’s entire immigration speech
How to solve the illegal immigration problem
Donald Trump explains his immigration plan
Heritage In Focus: Cost of Low-Skilled Immigrants
Robert Rector – Welfare Use by Legal and Illegal Immigrants
Stop Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants – Expert Reveals the True Cost of Amnesty
Immigration by the Numbers — Off the Charts
Immigration Gumballs and White Genocide Best explanation ever
How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the US? – Walsh – 1
Uploaded on Oct 20, 2007
How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the United States? Presentation by James H. Walsh, Associate General Counsel of the former INS – part 1.
Census Bureau estimates of the number of illegals in the U.S. are suspect and may represent significant undercounts. The studies presented by these authors show that the numbers of illegal aliens in the U.S. could range from 20 to 38 million.
On October 3, 2007, a press conference and panel discussion was hosted by Californians for Population Stabilization (http://www.CAPSweb.org) and The Social Contract (http://www.TheSocialContract.com) to discuss alternative methodologies for estimating the true numbers of illegal aliens residing in the United States.
This is a presentation of five panelists presenting at the National Press Club, Washington, D.C. on October 3, 2007. The presentations are broken into a series of video segments:
How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the US? – Walsh – 2
U.S. Border Patrol Chief: Assaults On U.S. Border Patrol Agents Up 200% From Last Year
On Wednesday, U.S. Border Patrol Chief Mark Morgan testified in front of the Senate Homeland Security Committee regarding the conditions on the southern border with Mexico.
During Morgan’s opening statement, he painted an unpleasant picture of what U.S. Border Patrol agents face every day.
“One thing was consistent and abundantly clear. The men and women of the U.S. Border Patrol have one of the toughest jobs in federal law enforcement,” Morgan said during the hearing.
“They are the most assaulted federal law enforcement in the United States, more than 7,400 border patrol agents have been assaulted since 2006,” Morgan told the committee. “That rose in FY16 by 20 percent, and year-to-date, we are seeing an increase in assaults of 200 percent from the previous year-to-date. It’s a dangerous job.”
Former FBI U.S. Border Patrol Chief ” I have a lot learn”
Risk Takers – 109 – Border Patrol Agents
LOOKOUT ILLEGALS! TRUMP’S DEPORTATION FORCE PLAN ALIVE AGAIN!
Fence Not Needed At Parts Of Mexico Border | MSNBC
Border Patrol Agent Who Catches Up To 500 Illegals A Day Says “They Want To Get Caught”
Border Patrol sounds the alarm! Look what’s happening!
Armed groups take US border patrol into their own hands
Border Patrol Listens To Trump, Not Obama
Reporter Runs Into Hundreds Of Illegal Immigrants Crossing The U.S Mexico Border
US-MEXICO Border: After Trump Win, Mexico Issues Statement on Trump Wall as if They’re Pleading.
Mexican Cement Company Offers to Help Trump Build Wall
The Truth About Illegal Immigrants: Was Donald Trump Right?
EXCLUSIVE — Immigration Officer: Border Deluge of Illegal Aliens ‘Is The Worst We’ve Ever Seen’
The flood of illegal aliens pouring across the southern border has become a “crisis situation” and is even worse than the record 2014 border surge, says an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer from El Paso, Texas with more than ten years of service to the agency.
by JULIA HAHN
The ICE agency has no room to house the arriving surge, so many illegals are being released into American communities where they disappear “into the wind never to be seen by us again,” the agent said.
The agent—who spoke to Breitbart News exclusively on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation by the administration—detailed how his overrun agency has been forced to pull agents from their mission of removing criminal aliens from the nation’s interior, so that they can help process the cross-border influx of illegal aliens.
The illegal aliens, mostly from Central America, are using President Barack Obama’s policies to request asylum, work permits and green cards. Whereas unlawful aliens traditionally sought to evade border agents in hopes of reaching U.S. cities where they could illegally fill American jobs, reports document how many of these new migrants are now turning themselves in to border patrol agents believing they’ll be allowed to stay permanently. This 2016 influx of migrants from Central America had exceeded 117,000 by Oct. 1, marking a new record, Breitbart Newsreported.
Many additional thousands of illegal aliens continue to pour across the border via smuggling routes that try to bypass the border patrol. In the 12 months up to October 2016, 271,000 illegal immigrants were caught trying to sneak across the border—but many others escaped arrest and made their way to U.S. workplaces and cities.
ICE is the agency responsible for enforcing federal immigration law by identifying and removing illegal aliens within the interior of the nation, as well as removing aliens apprehended at the border by border patrol. After an alien is apprehended by border patrol, the alien is then turned over to ICE, which processes and detains the alien.
Although the surge has been largely ignored by corporate media and unacknowledged by the administration, “the public’s safe is in jeopardy,” the agent warned. Migrants with histories of prior criminal offenses, plus “would-be perpetrators or terrorists whose intent is to harm Americans or our country as a whole” could be among those being released from ICE’s custody, the agent said.
The officer said he believes the reason corporate media refuse to cover the crisis is because “it’s an election year and [the media] have a politically-driven agenda. I don’t know why else it wouldn’t be covered—this is the worst we’ve ever seen it,” the agent said:
This is a crisis situation that is not being acknowledged by the administration or the media. I know we had a crisis situation in 2014, but this has this by far surpassed that. Our officers are overworked and overrun. We have had to move several officers from our interior enforcement programs in order to address and assist the officers who have to process all of the illegal border crossers and who are getting hammered by the crisis we’re facing down here.
“The safety of the American public is at risk,” the officer warned.
Would-be perpetrators have much more of a chance to make it through the system and into our communities. That’s a huge concern for us. I don’t understand why the administration and the media are not recognizing this as a crisis because that’s what it is. By removing officers from enforcement programs, the threat to the American public has increased exponentially… However many officers we move from enforcement programs to help address this crisis means that there are that many fewer people trying to find criminal aliens, and that poses a threat to public safety. It’s infringing upon our efforts to keep the American public safe.
“In my book, if we miss one criminal alien who goes not to victimize one American citizen, that’s one too many,” the agent said. “But with the scale we’re talking about here, it’s likely lots of criminal aliens will to be able to slip through the system. So many Americans could potentially be affected by this.”
However, the agent’s view does not seem to be shared by many lawmakers. For instance, both Tim Kaine and Hillary Clinton have shunned the American victims of illegal alien crime. Similarly, Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan, who last year voted to grant federal funding to Sanctuary Cities, literally fled from grieving mothers, who were forced to bury their children as a result of open borders, as they sought to give him a letter begging him to enforce the nation’s immigration laws.
“There are lots of aliens we should be removing, but we can’t do it because we’re handcuffed by policies,” the agent explained. “The surge is worse than it was in 2014. Our southern border is not secure. It’s so porous. We have people working seven days a week just meet the demand and workload that’s being created by this administration’s policies.”
“The administration’s policies have created the influx and the crisis situation because people overrun our border knowing they have a chance to stay,” the officer said. “The workload, the number of people, we’ve had to deal with has by far surpassed any amount we’ve ever had to handle before.
“The Office of Refugee Resettlement is at capacity. The continued influx is going to put us way over capacity,” the officer explained. “Once they’re processed, we have to either find placement for them or release them, and right now we don’t have any place to put them… If we have nowhere to house them, they’re going to be released into the public—hundreds of bodies will be released.”
The officer continued:
In just the past two days alone we’re talking in the neighborhood of 200 bodies or more that we need to either find placement for or that will be released from our custody. This figure doesn’t include all of the other people that we have yet to process—at ports of entry they have close to 500 aliens to process who have yet to come into our custody. I’m hearing that they’re even pulling border patrol agents to assist them because they don’t have enough to keep up with processing all of the aliens.
“And mind you,” the officer added, “that figure is just the number of people that come over as a family unit—this doesn’t include the unaccompanied children or illegal adults who cross the border.”
This is significant because Hillary Clinton has pledged to “end family detention and close private immigrant detention centers.”
“Hillary believes we should end family detention for parents and children who arrive at our border in desperate situations. We have alternatives to detention for those who pose no flight or public safety risk, such as supervised release,” reads Clinton’s campaign website.
The agent described such a proposal as “ridiculous” and dangerous—as her plan could enable criminal aliens to enter the country and victimize innocent Americans. “If we think we have a mass migration problem now, and she’s trying to propose something like that, it’s only going to further overrun our borders and our officers,” the agent said.
“Does she propose we just release them?” the agent asked. “It sounds like she wants to create just another avenue for criminal aliens to re-enter the country and commit more crimes, and victimize more people while they’re here… Her proposal seems pretty far-fetched and seems to lack any knowledge of what the real issues are… There have been many instances where the men that we’re processing, who arrive with their family unit, have some criminal offenses in their history—is she proposing that we not investigate that?”
In September, the National ICE Council, which represents the nation’s roughly 5,000 frontline ICE officers, agents, and personnel endorsed Donald Trump over Clinton and “urged all Americans, especially the millions of lawful immigrants living within our country, to support Donald J. Trump, and to protect American jobs, wages and lives.” The endorsement marked the ICE Council’s first-ever endorsement of any candidate for any elected office.
In a statement announcing the endorsement, the council’s president warned against Clinton’s “radical plan” of “total amnesty plus open borders” that “would result in the loss of innocent American lives, mass victimization and death for many attempting to immigrate to the United States, the total gutting of interior enforcement, the handcuffing of ICE officers, and uncontrollable flood of illegal immigrants across U.S. borders.” The ICE Council president warned that the agenda of non-enforcement, favored by Clinton, “results in the daily loss of life.”
Story 1: Breaking: Trump Greasing The Skids For A Massive Budget Busting $1,000 Billion Stimulus Bill For infrastructure Government Spending and/or Sells Bonds (Treasury Securities) For Private Investment in Infrastructure– Can You Say Toll Roads (82% of Profits Tax Free) or Privatize All Roads and Highways? — Trump Selects Elaine Chao as Secretary of Transportation (Wife of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell) — Videos
Trump’s Select Conservative Politicans For Cabinet
Is “Elaine Chao” part of the “swamp”?
Does she fit Trump’s description !?
Breaking: Trump picks Elaine Chao for Transportation secretary
Trump Cabinet – Donald Trump Picks Elaine Chao as Transportation Secretary
Published on Nov 29, 2016
President-elect Donald Trump is transitioning to the presidency and selecting members of his cabinet.
Trump Cabinet – Donald Trump Picks Elaine Chao as Transportation Secretary
Wife of Senate Majority Leader McConnell earlier served as secretary of labor under President George W. Bush
President-elect Donald Trump has selected Elaine Chao to be his transportation secretary, according to two transition officials.
Ms. Chao, who is married to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, would join South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, tapped for U.S. ambassador to the United Nations
Elaine Chao, who Donald Trump has nominated for Transportation Secretary, is married to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. The two have been married since 1993 and have no children.
Chao previously served as the director of the Peace Corps during President George H.W. Bush’s administration and was the Secretary of Labor for all eight years of the George W. Bush administration. The 63-year-old Chao was born in Taipei, Taiwan and has lived in the U.S. since she was eight years old.
As for McConnell, he has been the Senate Majority Leader since 2015, when Republicans took control of the Senate after the 2014 mid-term election. He was first elected to the Senate in 1985 and was named Senate Minority Leader in 2007. McConnell was previously married to Sherrill Redmon and the two have three daughters together.
Trump to Select Elaine Chao as Transportation Secretary
Trump’s Infrastructure Investment Plan Evokes Ayn Rand
Published on Nov 14, 2016
Donald Trump’s billion-dollar infrastructure plan calls for private investment to fund improvements. How would that work? And in what ways does it evoke Ayn Rand’s vision of a privatized nation? WSJ’s Jason Bellini has #TheShortAnswer. Photo: AP.
Can we afford Trump’s infrastructure spending?
Could Trump’s infrastructure plan create 1 million jobs?
Can Trump fulfill $1 trillion infrastructure promise?
Trump promises to make infrastructure a major focus
Published on Nov 12, 2016
Donald Trump has signaled that infrastructure will be a major issue in his administration. He has also promised to create 25 million jobs through infrastructure spending, tax reduction, trade deal reform and lifting restrictions on American energy development. Laura Bliss of CityLab and Binyamin Appelbaum, a correspondent for The New York Times, join Alison Stewart.
Can Trump Keep His Promises on Infrastructure?
Bernie Sanders Exposes Trump’s Infrastructure Plan as a SCAM
Elaine Chao was born in Taipei, Taiwan. The eldest of six daughters, Chao was born to Ruth Mulan Chu Chao (趙朱木蘭 Zhào Zhū Mùlán), an historian, and Dr. James S.C. Chao (趙錫成 Zhào Xīchéng), who began his career as a merchant mariner and later founded a successful shipping company in New York City called Foremost Shipping.[5] Chao’s parents had fled to Taiwan from Shanghai on mainland China after the Chinese Communists took over after the Chinese Civil War in 1949. When she was 8 years old, in 1961, Chao came to the United States on a freight ship with her mother and two younger sisters. Her father had arrived in New York three years earlier after receiving a scholarship.[6]
Chao was granted a White House Fellowship in 1983 during the Reagan administration. In October 2013, Chao told a game show audience that the fellowship was part of a special program with Citicorp. “They selected outstanding performers within the bank and gave them an opportunity to support them for a stint in the government,” Chao said.[12]
Before a 1999 House panel during the 1996 United States campaign finance controversy, John Huang testified that Chao had asked him to give money to her husband, Mitch McConnell, and that his Indonesian employer illegally reimbursed him for $2,000 he ultimately gave to McConnell’s 1990 campaign. Huang later repeated the assertion in testimony in a federal suit, in which he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws in funneling $100,000 in illegal donations to President Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign.[15]
United Way and Heritage Foundation
Following her service in the government, Chao worked for four years as President and CEO of United Way of America. She is credited with returning credibility and public trust in the organization after a financial mismanagement scandal involving former president William Aramony. From 1996 until her appointment as Secretary of Labor, Chao was a Distinguished Fellow with the Heritage Foundation, aconservativethink tank in Washington, D.C. She was also a board member of the Independent Women’s Forum.[16] She returned to the Heritage Foundation after leaving the government in January 2009.
U.S. Secretary of Labor (2001–2009)
Portrait of Elaine Chao by Chen Yanning in the Great Hall of the U.S. Department of Labor’sFrances Perkins Building. It features the American flag, theKentucky state flag, the U.S. Capitol, and photos of her husband, Mitch McConnell, and her parents, James and Ruth Chao.[17]
Under her leadership, the U.S. Department of Labor undertook regulatory and legislative reforms in “protecting the health, safety, wages, and retirement security” of U.S. workers by “recovering record levels of back wages and monetary recoveries for pension plans, and obtaining record financial settlements for discrimination by federal contractors.” She also restructured departmental programs and modernized regulations.[20]
In 2002, a major west coast ports dispute costing the U.S. economy nearly $1 billion daily was resolved when the Bush administration obtained a national emergency injunction against both the employers and the union under the Taft–Hartley Act for the first time since 1971.[21] In 2003, for the first time in more than 40 years, the Department updated the labor union financial disclosure regulations under the Landrum–Griffin Act of 1959 to provide union members with more information on union finances. In 2004, the Department issued revisions of the white-collar overtime regulations under the Fair Labor Standards Act.[22]
In July and August 2003, Chao and her colleagues, Treasury Secretary John W. Snow and Commerce Secretary Donald Evans, took a bus across the country on their “Jobs and Growth Tour” aimed at promoting the benefits of the Bush administration’s tax cuts.[23]
Chao’s tenure as Labor Secretary saw two mine disasters for which she was criticized. Twelve miners were killed in the Sago Mine disaster on January 2, 2006, and three rescue workers died in the Crandall Canyon Mine disaster on August 6, 2007. Before the mines collapsed, Chao had cut more than a hundred coal mine safety inspections.[25] According to the Christian Science Monitor, “Nearly half of the 208 safety citations levied in 2005 against the Sago coal mine where 12 men died this week were ‘serious and substantial.'”[26] On December 10, 2008, Chao announced that the Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) had, in the first year of the agency’s 100 Percent Plan, achieved its goal of completing every mandated regular inspection for the year, a first in the agency’s 31-year history.[27]
A 2008 report by the department’s inspector general found that despite implementation of the Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006, mine safety regulators did not conduct federally required inspections at more than 14% of the country’s 731 underground coal mines, and that the number of worker deaths in mining accidents more than doubled to 47.[28] A 2009 internal audit appraising an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) initiative focusing on problematic workplaces revealed that employees had failed to gather needed data, conducted uneven inspections and enforcement, and failed to discern repeat fatalities because records misspelled the companies’ names or failed to notice when two subsidiaries with the same owner were involved.[29] However, OSHA statistics for 2007 and 2008 revealed that overall workplace fatality rates and workplace injury and illness rates were “both at all-time lows.”[30][31]
A 2008 Government Accountability Office report noted that the Labor Department gave Congress inaccurate numbers that understated the expense of contracting out its employees’ work to private firms during Chao’s tenure.[32][33]
A report by the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, under the Chairmanship of Henry A. Waxman (D–Calif.), alleged that Chao and other White House officials campaigned for Republican candidates at taxpayer expense.[34] The report described this as a violation of the Hatch Act of 1939, which restricts the use of public funds for partisan gain,[35] but no action was taken by any entity with responsibility for enforcing the Hatch Act.
Life after Bush administration (2009–2016)
In 2009 Chao resumed her previous role as a Distinguished Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, and she contributes to Fox News and other media outlets.
In 2011 and 2013, Chao attended Shanghai signing ceremonies for Capesizebulkers launched by the Foremost Group, her father’s company, where she spoke publicly about U.S.–China relations.[46] At the 2013 ceremony, Chao stated, “The U.S.-China relations[hip] is among the most important bilateral relationships in the world. And as such, there is no other alternative but to have a harmonious and a cooperative relationship. As with any relationship, there are bound to be ups, downs, disagreements, but in the overall scheme of things, in the overall direction, for the benefit of the world, [the] U.S. and China must get along, and must find a way to do so.”[47]
In 2013, Chao recorded a motivational video to inspire Asian-American children.[48]
She also organized the “orientation for the spouses of Republican senators” in Washington, D.C.[4]
In the two years leading up to the 2014 U.S. Senate elections, she “headlined fifty of her own events and attended hundreds more with and on behalf of” her husband and was seen as “a driving force of his reelection campaign” and eventual victory over Democratic candidate Alison Lundergan Grimes, who had portrayed McConnell as “anti-woman.”[52] After winning the election, McConnell said, “The biggest asset I have by far is the only Kentucky woman who served in a president’s cabinet, my wife, Elaine Chao.”[53]
Additionally, she adds “a softer touch” to McConnell’s style by speaking of him “in a feminine, wifely way,” as Jan Karzen, a longtime friend of McConnell’s, put it.[4] She has been described as “the campaign hugger”[52] and is also known for bipartisan socializing. For example, in 2014 she hosted a dinner with philanthropist Catherine B. Reynolds to welcome Penny Pritzker as Secretary of Commerce, where she spent the evening socializing with Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s top advisor.[4]
The New York Times has described her as “an unapologetically ambitious operator with an expansive network, a short fuse, and a seemingly inexhaustible drive to get to the top and stay there.” It reported that as labor secretary, she “had gold-colored coins minted with her name in bas-relief and employed a “Veep“-like staff member who carried around her bag.”[4]
Her father, James S.C. Chao, is a shipping magnate who founded the Foremost Group. In April 2008, Chao’s father gave Chao and McConnell between $5 million and $25 million, which “boosted McConnell’s personal worth from a minimum of $3 million in 2007 to more than $7 million”[56] and “helped the McConnells after their stock portfolio dipped in the wake of the financial crisis that year.”[57]
Addison Mitchell “Mitch” McConnell, Jr. (born February 20, 1942) is the senior United States Senator from Kentucky. A member of the Republican Party, he has been the Majority Leader of the Senate since January 3, 2015. He is the 15th Republican and the second Kentuckian to lead his party in the Senate.[1] Despite having the lowest approval rating in the Senate,[2] McConnell is the longest-serving U.S. Senator in Kentucky history.[3]
Early life and education
Mitch McConnell was born on February 20, 1942, in a hospital in Sheffield, Alabama, which is now called the Helen Keller Hospital, and raised as a young child in nearby Athens.[4]McConnell is the son of Addison Mitchell McConnell, and his wife, Julia (née Shockley). As a youth, he overcame polio.[5] His family moved to Georgia when he was eight.[6]
When he was a teenager, his family arrived in Louisville where he attended duPont Manual High School. He graduated with honors from the University of Louisville with a B.A. inhistory in 1966. McConnell was president of the Student Council of the College of Arts and Sciences and a member of the Phi Kappa Tau fraternity. He has maintained strong ties to his alma mater and “remains a rabid fan of its sports teams.”[7] Three years later, McConnell graduated from the University of Kentucky College of Law, where he was president of the Student Bar Association. McConnell is of Irish and English descent.[8]
In 1984, McConnell ran for the U.S. Senate against two-term Democratic incumbent Walter Dee Huddleston. The election race wasn’t decided until the last returns came in, and McConnell won by a thin margin—only 5,200 votes out of more than 1.8 million votes cast, just over 0.4%.[13] McConnell was the only Republican Senate challenger to win that year, despite Ronald Reagan‘s landslide victory in the presidential election. Part of McConnell’s success came from a series of television campaign spots called “Where’s Dee”, which featured a group of bloodhounds trying to find Huddleston,[14][15] implying that Huddleston’s attendance record in the Senate was less than stellar. His campaign bumper stickers and television ads asked voters to “Switch to Mitch”.[16]
In 1996, he defeated Steve Beshear by 12.6%, even as Bill Clintonnarrowly carried the state. In keeping with a tradition of humorous and effective television ads in his campaigns, McConnell’s campaign ran television ads that warned voters to not “Get BeSheared” and included images of sheep being sheared.[16]
In 2014, McConnell faced Louisville businessman Matt Bevin in the Republican primary.[18] The 60.2% won by McConnell was the lowest voter support for a Kentucky U.S. Senator in a primary by either party since 1938.[19] He faced Democratic Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes in the general election. Although polls showed the race was very close, ultimately McConnell defeated Grimes by 56.2%–40.7%, 15.5 percentage points – one of his largest margins of victory, second only to his 2002 margin.
According to The New York Times, in his early years as a politician in Kentucky, McConnell was “something of a centrist”. In recent years, however, McConnell has veered sharply to the right. He now opposed collective-bargaining rights and minimum-wage increases that he previously supported, and abandoned pork barrel projects he once delivered to the state of Kentucky. He believed that Reagan’s popularity made conservatism much more appealing.[11]
According to a profile in Politico, “While most politicians desperately want to be liked, McConnell has relished—and cultivated—his reputation as a villain.” The Politico profile also noted “For most of Obama‘s presidency, McConnell has been the face of Republican obstructionism.”[20] According to Salon, “Despite McConnell’s reputation as the man who said his No. 1 goal was to stop President Obama from winning a second term, it’s been McConnell at the table when the big deals—be they over threatened government shutdowns, debt defaults or fiscal cliffs—have been finalized.”[21]
With a 49% disapproval rate, he has the highest disapproval rate out of all senators.[22]
Foreign policy
After winning election to the U.S. Senate in 1984, McConnell backed anti-apartheid legislation with Chris Dodd.[23] McConnell went on to engineer new IMF funding to “faithfully protect aid to Egypt and Israel,” and “promote free elections and better treatment of Muslim refugees” in Myanmar, Cambodia and Macedonia. According to a March 2014 article in Politico, “McConnell was a ‘go-to guy’ for presidents of both parties seeking foreign aid,” but he has lost some of his idealism and has evolved to be more wary of foreign assistance.[24]
McConnell stands in front and directly to the right of President Obama as he signs tax cuts and unemployment insurance legislation on December 17, 2010.
In August 2007, McConnell introduced the Protect America Act of 2007, which allowed the National Security Agency to monitor telephone and electronic communications of suspected terrorists outside the United States without obtaining a warrant.[25] McConnell was the only party leader in Congress to oppose the resolution that would authorize military strikes againstSyria in September 2013, citing a lack of national security risk.[26]
McConnell argues that campaign finance regulations reduce participation in political campaigns and protect incumbents from competition.[29] He spearheaded the movement against theBipartisan Campaign Reform Act (known since 1995 as the “McCain–Feingold bill” and from 1989–1994 as the “Boren–Mitchell bill”), calling it “neither fair, nor balanced, nor constitutional.”[30] His opposition to the bill culminated in the 2003 Supreme Court case McConnell v. Federal Election Commission and the 2009 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. McConnell has been an advocate for free speech at least as far back as the early 1970s when he was teaching night courses at the University of Louisville. “No issue has shaped his career more than the intersection of campaign financing and free speech,” political reporter Robert Costa wrote in 2012.[31] In a recording of a 2014 fundraiser McConnell expressed his disapproval of the McCain-Feingold law, saying, “The worst day of my political life was when President George W. Bush signed McCain-Feingold into law in the early part of his first Administration.”[32]
On January 2, 2013, the Public Campaign Action Fund, a liberal nonprofit group that backs stronger campaign finance regulation, released a report highlighting eight instances from McConnell’s political career in which a vote or a blocked vote (filibuster), coincided with an influx of campaign contributions to McConnell’s campaign.[33][34]Progress Kentucky, a SuperPAC focused on defeating McConnell in 2014, hosted a press conference in front of the Senator’s Louisville office to highlight the report’s findings.[35][36]
Flag Desecration Amendment
McConnell opposed the Flag Desecration Amendment in 2000. According to McConnell: “We must curb this reflexive practice of attempting to cure each and every political and social ill of our nation by tampering with the Constitution. The Constitution of this country was not a rough draft. It was not a rough draft and we should not treat it as such.” McConnell offered an amendment to the measure that would have made flag desecration a statutory crime, illegal without amending the Constitution.[37]
Health policy
In August 2001, McConnell introduced the Common Sense Medical Malpractice Reform Act of 2001. The bill would require that a health care liability action must be initiated within two years, non-economic damages may not exceed $250,000, and punitive damages may only be awarded in specified situations.[38]
McConnell received the Kentucky Life Science Champion Awards for his work in promoting innovation in the life science sector.[42]
Economy
In July 2003, McConnell sponsored the Small Business Liability Reform Act of 2003. The bill would protect small businesses from litigation excesses and limit the liability of non-manufacturer product sellers.[43][44]
McConnell was the sponsor of the Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008. The bill, which did not pass, would have allowed states to engage in increased offshore and domestic oil exploration in an effort to curb rising gas prices.[45]
In June 2008, McConnell introduced the Alternative Minimum Tax and Extenders Tax Relief Act of 2008. The bill was intended to limit the impact of the Alternative Minimum Tax.[46][better source needed]
McConnell with President Barack Obama, August 2010.
In an interview with National Journal magazine published October 23, 2010, McConnell explained that “the single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” Asked whether this meant “endless, or at least frequent, confrontation with the president,” McConnell clarified that “if [Obama is] willing to meet us halfway on some of the biggest issues, it’s not inappropriate for us to do business with him.”[47]
In September 2010, McConnell sponsored the Tax Hike Prevention Act of 2010. The bill would have permanently extended the tax relief provisions of 2001 and 2003 and provided permanent Alternative Minimum Tax and estate tax relief.[48][better source needed]
In 2010, McConnell requested earmarks for the defense contractor BAE Systems while the company was under investigation by the Department of Justice for alleged bribery of foreign officials.[49][unreliable source?]
In June 2011, McConnell introduced a Constitutional Balanced Budget Amendment. The amendment would require two-thirds votes in Congress to increase taxes or for federal spending to exceed the current year’s tax receipts or 18% of the prior year’s GDP. The amendment specifies situations when these requirements would be waived.[50][51]
In December 2012, McConnell called for a vote on giving the president unilateral authority to raise the federal debt ceiling. When Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) called for an up or down vote, McConnell objected to the vote and ended up filibustering it himself.[52] In 2014, McConnell voted to help break Ted Cruz‘s filibuster attempt against a debt limit increase and then against the bill itself.[53]
After two intersessions to get federal grants for Alltech, whose president T. Pearse Lyons made subsequent campaign contributions to McConnell, to build a plant in Kentucky for producing ethanol from algae, corncobs, and switchgrass, McConnell criticized President Obama in 2012 for twice mentioning biofuel production from algae in a speech touting his “all-of-the-above” energy policy.[54][55]
In April 2014, the United States Senate debated the Paycheck Fairness Act (S. 2199; 113th Congress). It was a bill that “punishes employers for retaliating against workers who share wage information, puts the justification burden on employers as to why someone is paid less and allows workers to sue for punitive damages of wage discrimination.”[56] McConnell said that he opposed the legislation because it would “line the pockets of trial lawyers” not help women.[56]
In July 2014, McConnell expressed opposition to a U.S. Senate bill that would limit the practice of corporate inversion by U.S. corporations seeking to limit U.S. tax liability.[57]
McConnell expressed skepticism that climate change is a problem, telling the Cincinnati Enquirer editorial board in 2014, “I’m not a scientist, I am interested in protecting Kentucky’s economy, I’m interested in having low cost electricity.” [58][59][60]
Gun rights
On the weekend of January 19–21, 2013, the McConnell for Senate campaign emailed and robo-called gun-rights supporters telling them that “President Obama and his team are doing everything in their power to restrict your constitutional right to keep and bear arms.” McConnell also said, “I’m doing everything in my power to protect your 2nd Amendment rights.”[61] On April 17, 2013, McConnell voted against expanding background checks for gun purchases.[62]
Iraq War
In October 2002, McConnell voted for the Iraq Resolution, which authorized military action against Iraq.[63] McConnell supported the Iraq War troop surge of 2007.[64] In 2010, McConnell “accused the White House of being more concerned about a messaging strategy than prosecuting a war against terrorism.”[65]
In 2006, McConnell publicly criticized Senate Democrats for urging that troops be brought back from Iraq.[66] According to Bush’s Decision Points memoir, however, McConnell was privately urging the then President to “bring some troops home from Iraq” to lessen the political risks. McConnell’s hometown paper, the Louisville Courier-Journal, in an editorial titled “McConnell’s True Colors”, criticized McConnell for his actions and asked him to “explain why the fortunes of the Republican Party are of greater importance than the safety of the United States.”[67]
Regarding the failure of the Iraqi government to make reforms, McConnell said the following on Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer: “The Iraqi government is a huge disappointment. Republicans overwhelmingly feel disappointed about the Iraqi government. I read just this week that a significant number of the Iraqi parliament want to vote to ask us to leave. I want to assure you, Wolf, if they vote to ask us to leave, we’ll be glad to comply with their request.”[68]
On April 21, 2009, McConnell delivered a speech to the Senate criticizing President Obama’s plans to close the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba, and questioned the additional 81 million dollar White House request for funds to transfer prisoners to the United States.[69][70]
In April 2010, while Congress was considering financial reform legislation, a reporter asked McConnell if he was “doing the bidding of the large banks.” McConnell has received more money in donations from the “Finance, Insurance and Real Estate” sector than any other sector according to the Center for Responsive Politics.[71][72] McConnell responded “I’d say that that’s inaccurate. You could talk to the community bankers in Kentucky.” The Democratic Party’s plan for financial reform is actually a way to institute “endless taxpayer funded bailouts for big Wall Street banks”, said McConnell. He expressed concern that the proposed $50 billion, bank-funded fund that would be used to liquidate financial firms that could collapse “would of course immediately signal to everyone that the government is ready to bail out large banks”.[71][72] In McConnell’s home state of Kentucky, the Lexington Herald-Leader ran an editorial saying: “We have read that the Republicans have a plan for financial reform, but McConnell isn’t talking up any solutions, just trashing the other side’s ideas with no respect for the truth.”[73]According to one tally, McConnell’s largest donor from the period from Jan. 1, 2009 to Sept. 30, 2015 was Bob McNair, contributing $1,502,500.[74]
2016 Supreme Court vacancy
In an August 2016 speech in Kentucky, Senator McConnell, speaking of President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court (to fill the vacancy caused by Antonin Scalia‘s death in February 2016) said, “One of my proudest moments was when I looked Barack Obama in the eye and I said, ‘Mr. President, you will not fill the Supreme Court vacancy.'”[75][76][77]
2016 Presidential Election
Senator McConnell initially endorsed fellow Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. Following Paul’s withdrawal, McConnell stayed neutral for the remainder of the primary. On May 4, 2016, McConnell endorsed then presumptive nominee Donald J. Trump. “I have committed to supporting the nominee chosen by Republican voters, and Donald Trump, the presumptive nominee, is now on the verge of clinching the nomination.”
On multiple occasions, McConnell criticized Trump but continued to endorse Trump’s candidacy. On May 27, 2016 after Trump suggested that a Federal Judge, Gonzalo P. Curiel, was biased against Trump because of his Mexican heritage, McConnell responded, “I don’t agree with what he (Trump) had to say. This is a man who was born in Indiana. All of us came here from somewhere else.” On July 31, 2016 after Trump had criticized the parents of Capt. Humayun Khan, a Muslim soldier who was killed in Iraq, McConnell stated, “Captain Khan was an American hero, and like all Americans, I’m grateful for the sacrifices that selfless young men like Captain Khan and their families have made in the war on terror. All Americans should value the patriotic service of the patriots who volunteer to selflessly defend us in the armed services.” On October 7, 2016, following the Donald TrumpAccess Hollywood controversy, McConnell stated: “As the father of three daughters, I strongly believe that Trump needs to apologize directly to women and girls everywhere, and take full responsibility for the utter lack of respect for women shown in his comments on that tape.”[78]
U.S. Senate Republican Primary election in Kentucky, 1984
Party
Candidate
Votes
%
+%
Republican
Mitch McConnell
39,465
79.2%
Republican
Roger Harker
3,798
7.6%
Republican
Tommy Klein
3,352
6.7%
Republican
Thurman Jerome Hamlin
3,202
6.4%
U.S. Senate Republican Primary election in Kentucky, 1990
Party
Candidate
Votes
%
+%
Republican
Mitch McConnell (inc.)
64,063
88.5%
Republican
Tommy Klein
8,310
11.5%
U.S. Senate Republican Primary election in Kentucky, 1996
Party
Candidate
Votes
%
+%
Republican
Mitch McConnell (inc.)
88,620
88.6%
Republican
Tommy Klein
11,410
11.4%
U.S. Senate Republican Primary election in Kentucky, 2008
Party
Candidate
Votes
%
+%
Republican
Mitch McConnell (inc.)
168,127
86.1%
Republican
Daniel Essek
27,170
13.9%
U.S. Senate Republican Primary election in Kentucky, 2014
Party
Candidate
Votes
%
+%
Republican
Mitch McConnell (inc.)
213,753
60.2%
Republican
Matt Bevin
125,787
35.4%
Republican
Shawna Sterling
7,214
2.0%
Republican
Chris Payne
5,338
1.5%
Republican
Brad Copas
3,024
0.9%
Personal life
McConnell is a Southern Baptist. John E. Kleber, Kentucky Bicentennial Commission, His first wife was Sherrill Redmon,[79] who later divorced him; they have three daughters.
In 2010, the OpenSecrets website ranked McConnell, because of net household worth, one of the wealthiest members of the U.S. Senate at the time,[84] because of gifts given to him and his wife in 2008 from his father-in-lawJames S.C. Chao after the death of his mother-in-law.[85][86]
In popular culture
McConnell appears in the title sequence of seasons 1 and 2 of Alpha House making a speech with Matt Malloy‘s Senator Louis Laffer apparently standing just behind him.
Steven Terner Mnuchin (born December 21, 1962) is an American banker, film producer and political fundraiser.
Early life
Steven Mnuchin was born to a Jewish family, circa 1963.[2][3] He is the son of Elaine Terner Cooper, of New York, and Robert E. Mnuchin, of Washington, Connecticut.[2] His father was a banker, a partner at Goldman Sachs, in charge of equity trading and a member of the management committee, and the founder of the Mnuchin Gallery at 45 East 78th Street, New York.[2][4] He graduated from Yale University.[2]
Career
Mnuchin amassed a fortune estimated at over $40 million while working for Goldman Sachs for 17 years, where his father had worked for three decades and had also made a fortune.[5][6]
In 2002, Mnuchin left Goldman and worked briefly for his Yale roommate Edward Lampert, chief executive of Sears. He also briefly worked for Soros Fund Management in their private equity division during the “Goldman” period with Jacob Goldfield and Mark Schwartz.
After this stint, he founded RatPac-Dune Entertainment, which produced a number of notable films, including the X-Men film franchise and Avatar.[6] Dune bought the failed housing lender IndyMac in 2009, buying it out of bankruptcy from the FDIC and renaming it OneWest with Mnuchin as chair. According to The New York Times, OneWest “was involved in a string of lawsuits over questionable foreclosures, and settled several cases for millions of dollars.” OneWest was sold to CIT Group in 2015.[5]
In November 2016, two nonprofits filed a complaint with the Department of Housing and Urban Development, alleging redlining by OneWest Bank.[7]
The California Reinvestment Coalition, which opposed CIT Group’s acquisition of OneWest, helped to highlight a number of issues about the bank, using Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. First, the “shared loss agreements” that Mnuchin and his group of investors secured from the FDIC when buying IndyMac and La Jolla banks proved to be quite lucrative. According to data obtained from the FDIC, as of December 2014, it had already paid out over $1 billion to OneWest for the costs of failed loans (foreclosures). The FDIC estimated it would have to pay out another $1.4 billion to OneWest before 2019.[8]
CRC also submitted a FOIA request to United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to learn more about OneWest’s reverse mortgage subsidiary, Financial Freedom. According to the data that HUD provided in its FOIA response, Financial Freedom foreclosed on 16,220 federally insured reverse mortgages from April 2009 to April 2016. This represents about 39% of all federally insured reverse mortgage foreclosures during that time frame. The 39% figure was criticized by CRC, who estimated that Financial Freedom only serviced about 17% of the market. In other words, Financial Freedom was foreclosing at twice the amount that one would expect, given its share of the market.[9]
CIT Group, which purchased OneWest, disclosed to investors that it had received subpoenas from HUD’s Office of the Inspector General in the third and fourth quarters of 2015.[10]
Because Mnuchin received stock in CIT Group when it purchased OneWest, it’s possible he could sell it tax free if he were confirmed to be Treasury Secretary and if he reinvested the proceeds in Treasuries or government approved funds, according to Bloomberg, which suggests Mnuchin has $97 million in CIT stock.[11]
In Hollywood, Mnuchin, along with film producer Brett Ratner and financier James Packer, working with RatPac-Dune Entertainment, produced American Sniper and Mad Max: Fury Road. Mnuchin was co-chairman of the trio’s movie company, Relativity Media, but left before it went bankrupt.[5] A source close to the company said that he had resigned because of the potential for a conflict of interest between his duties at Relativity and OneWest, which had been sold days ago; weeks prior to Relativity’s insolvency filling, OneWest was allowed to drain $50 million from it.[6]
In 1999, he married Heather deForest Crosby,[2] who was his second wife,[12] and they had three children together.[13] They divorced in 2014. He is engaged to the actress Louise Linton, and they live in a $26.5 million house that he owns in Bel Air, California.[12][13]
He ran an orthopedic clinic in Atlanta for 20 years before returning to Emory as assistant professor of orthopedic surgery. Price also was the director of the orthopedic clinic at Atlanta’s Grady Memorial Hospital.
Georgia Senate (1996–2005)
Elections
In 1996, State Senator Sallie Newbill (R) decided not to run for re-election. Price was the Republican nominee for Georgia’s 56th senate district. In the November general election, he defeated Democrat Ellen Milholland 71%–29%.[6] In 1998, he won re-election to a second term by defeating her in a rematch, 75%–25%.[7] In 2000 and 2002, he won re-election to a third and fourth term unopposed.[8][9]
U.S. House of Representatives (2005–present)[edit]
Elections
2004
In 2004, U.S. Congressman Johnny Isakson of Georgia’s 6th congressional district decided not to run for re-election in order to run for the U.S. Senate. No Democrat even filed, meaning that whoever won the Republican primary would be virtually assured of being the district’s next congressman. The 6th district was so heavily Republican that any Democratic candidate would have faced nearly impossible odds in any event. Six other Republican candidates filed to run, most notably state senators Robert Lamutt and Chuck Clay. Price was the only major candidate from Fulton County, while Lamutt and Clay were both from Cobb County. On July 20, 2004, Price ranked first with 35% of the vote, but failed to reach the 50% threshold needed to win the Republican nomination. Lamutt qualified for the run-off, ranking second with 28% of the vote. Price won two of the district’s three counties: Fultonwith 63% and Cherokee with 35%. Lamutt carried Cobb with 31% of the vote.[12] In the August 10 run-off election, Price defeated Lamutt 54%–46%. They split the vote in Cherokee, but Price carried Fulton by a landslide of 79% of the vote. Lamutt couldn’t eliminate that deficit as he won Cobb with just 59% of the vote.[13] Price won the general election unopposed.[14]
2006
In 2006, Price drew one primary challenger, John Konop, who he easily defeated 82%–18%.[15] In November, he won re-election to a second term with 72% of the vote.[16]
2008–2014
Price won re-election in 2008 (68%),[17] 2010 (99.9%),[18] and 2012 (65%).[19]
2016
Tom Price won the election in 2016 against Rodney Stooksbury (Democratic). Price received 61.6% of the votes.
Congressman Price speaking at Freedomworks New Fair Deal Rally outside the US Capitol
In 2011, Price voted to prohibit funding of NPR,[20] to terminate the Emergency Mortgage Relief Program,[21] to extend the PATRIOT act,[22][23] to repeal portions of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 on multiple occasions,[24][25] to reduce non-security discretionary spending to 2008 levels [26][27][28](and subsequently voted against several amendments offered via motions to recommit with instructions)[29]),to reduce Federal spending and the deficit by terminating taxpayer financing of presidential election campaigns and party conventions,[30] to provide funding for government agencies, including the Department of Defense, through September 30, 2011,[31] to cut the Federal Housing Authority’s refinancing program,[32] and against a resolution which would force the president to withdraw American forces from Iraq.[33] In 2013, he was the main sponsor of the Require A PLAN Act;[34][35] he voted for the No Budget, No Pay Act[36][37] and a resolution establishing a budget for the United States Government for FY 2014 that passed the House of Representatives.[38]
Tom Price opposes abortion and supported the proposed Protect Life Act, which would have denied Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) funding to health care plans that offered abortion (the PPACA already prevented public funding covering abortions) and allowed hospitals to decline to provide emergency abortion care.[39][40] He was rated at 100 by the National Right to Life Center. He was rated at 0 by Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America.[41][42] He participated in the 2011 March for Life.[43]
Tom Price voted against a bill prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation (Nov 2007). He voted in favor of constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman (Jul 2006). Representative Price voted against H.R. 2965, which would have ended Don’t ask, don’t tell. He receives a 0% rating by the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights organization.[47]
Tom Price does not support federal regulation of farming. He has voted against regulating and restricting farmers, earning him a 70% from the American Farm Bureau Federation. However, due to this belief, the National Farmers Union gave him a 0% approval rate.[48] He supported the Farm Dust Regulation Prevention Act, stating that it would keep theEnvironmental Protection Agency from applying too many regulations to farming and ranching.[49] He also voted for the Agricultural Disaster Assistance Act of 2012 which, had it become law, would have made supplemental agricultural disaster assistance available, if needed.[50][51]
In 2008 Price signed a pledge sponsored by Americans for Prosperity promising to vote against any Global Warming legislation that would raise taxes.[52]
Legislation
Price speaking on a panel about healthcare at the 2014 Conservative Political Action Conference.
Price is the sponsor of the Empowering Patients First Act (EPFA), which he first introduced in the 111th Congress and has reintroduced in each Congress since then. Originally intended to be a Republican alternative to Democratic efforts to reform the health care system, it has since been positioned by Price and other Republicans as a potential replacement to the PPACA. The bill, among other things, creates and expands tax credits for purchasing health insurance, allows for some interstate health insurance markets, and reforms medical malpractice lawsuits.
Price introduced the Pro-Growth Budgeting Act of 2013 (H.R. 1874; 113th Congress) on May 8, 2013.[53] The bill would require the Congressional Budget Office to provide a macroeconomic impact analysis for bills that are estimated to have a large budgetary effect.[54] Price said it was necessary because the Congressional Budget Office’s current method of reviewing bills just to see what they would cost. Price said “that is a model that has proven to be incapable of providing the type of macroeconomic diagnosis folks need to make sure we are pursuing policies that will help generate economic opportunity and bring down the nation’s debt.”[55] H.R. 1874 has passed the House but has yet to become law.
In total, Price has sponsored 55 bills, including:[56]
109th Congress (2005–2006)
H.R. 3693, a bill to prevent all illegal border crossings after a certain date, introduced September 7, 2005
H.R. 3860, a bill to require each state and U.S. territory to maintain a sex offender registry, to increase punishments for sexual and violent crimes against children and minors, and to require background checks of individuals before approval of adoptive or foster services, introduced September 22, 2005
H.R. 3941, a bill to reduce foreign oil consumption to less than 25% of total oil consumption by no later than 2015, introduced September 29, 2005, reintroduced in the 110th Congress as H.R. 817
H.R. 6133, a bill to create national standards for work in laboratories that includes requiring proficiency in cytology, introduced September 21, 2006. H.R. 6133’s companion bill was S. 4056.
110th Congress (2007–2008)
H.R. 1685, a bill to require holders of personal financial data to increase security of such data, introduced March 26, 2007
H.R. 1761, a bill to create a competitive grant program to reward such grants to educational institutions and systems to develop and implement performance-based compensation systems for teachers to encourage teachers to improve educational outcomes, introduced March 29, 2007, reintroduced in the 111th Congress as H.R. 3683
H.R. 2626, a bill to allow for tax credits and deductions for purchasing health insurance, to revise government employer contribution amounts, to reform malpractice lawsuits, to provide financial aid to introduce health information technology, to allow for a tax credit for emergency room physicians to offset costs incurred because of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, and to promote interstate health insurance markets, introduced June 7, 2007. This bill served as the precursor to EPFA, and most of H.R. 2626’s provisions are included in EPFA.
H.R. 4464, a bill to amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to clarify that it is not unlawful for any employer to require proficiency in English as a condition of employment, introduced December 12, 2007, reintroduced in the 111th Congress as H.R. 1588
H.R. 6910, a bill to expand oil and natural gas drilling and use revenue generated from such drilling to fund monetary rewards for advancing the research, development, demonstration, and commercial application of alternative fuel vehicles, introduced September 18, 2008
111th Congress (2009–2010)
H.R. 464, a bill to require states to cover 90% of eligible children for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) in the program for households with incomes below 200% of the federal poverty level (FPL), with special rules above 200% of the FPL, to prohibit SCHIP from funding child health care for children in households above 250% of the FPL, and to require more than one health plan to be offered in SCHIP, introduced January 13, 2009. Modified versions of this bill’s provisions make up Title IV of EPFA.
H.R. 3372, a bill to develop best practice guidelines for treating medical conditions and to reform malpractice lawsuits, introduced July 29, 2009, reintroduced in the 112th Congress as H.R. 2363. Modified versions of this bill’s provisions make up Title V of EPFA.
H.R. 6170, a bill to prevent the Secretary of Health and Human Services from precluding an enrollee, participant, or beneficiary in a health benefits plan from entering into any contract or arrangement for health care with any health care provider, excluding Medicaid and TRICARE, introduced September 22, 2010. This bill’s provisions are included in Title X of EPFA.
H.R. 6171, a bill to prevent the Secretary of Health and Human Services or any state from requiring any health care provider to participate in any health plan as a condition of licensure of the provider in any state, introduced September 22, 2010, reintroduced in the 112th and 113th Congresses as H.R. 969. This bill’s provisions are included in Title X of EPFA.
112th Congress (2011–2012)
H.R. 1700, a bill to allow for Medicare beneficiaries to contract with any health care professionals that provide care covered under the Medicare program, with special circumstances, introduced March 3, 2011, reintroduced in the 113th Congress as H.R. 1310. This bill’s provisions are included in Title X of EPFA.
H.R. 2077, a bill to repeal the medical loss ratio provision of the PPACA, introduced June 1, 2011
H.R. 4066, a bill to exclude pathologists from Medicare and Medicaid incentive payments and penalties relating to electronic health records, introduced February 6, 2012, reintroduced in the 113th Congress as H.R. 1309
H.R. 6616, a bill to exempt U.S. securities transactions from financial taxes and penalties imposed by other nations, introduced November 19, 2012, reintroduced in the 113th Congress as H.R. 2546
113th Congress (2013–2014)
H.R. 1990 and H.R. 2009, bills to prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury, or any delegate of the Secretary, from implementing or enforcing any provisions of or amendments made by the PPACA or the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, introduced May 15 and 16, 2013. H.R. 2009 has passed the House but has yet to become law.
Price and his wife Betty reside in Roswell, and have one child, Robert Price.[57] Betty served on the Roswell City Council and was elected to the Georgia House of Representatives in a 2015 special election to succeed the lateHarry Geisinger.[58] Price is a Presbyterian.
Story 1: Radical Islamic Terrorist Attack At Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, By Abdul Razak Ali Artan OSU Student– 9 Injured By Car and Butcher Knife, 8 Hospitalized — Attacker Killed By Police — Videos
Could the attack at OSU be terror related?
Attack on Ohio State University leaves multiple injured, suspect dead
Suspect dead, 9 hurt in attack on campus of Ohio State
Ohio State University attack. Suspect killed, 9 hospitalized after campus attack. John Kasich
Terrorism Suspected In Car-And-Knife Attack At Ohio State
Terrorism Suspected At Ohio State
Jihad Terror Attack at OSU – Ohio State University
Mass Stabbing at Ohio State University: Active Attacker on Campus – RUN, HIDE, FIGHT [BREAKING NEWS]
BREAKING Update Conflicting reports TERRORIST ATTACK Ohio State Terrorist shot dead November 28 2016
Ohio State attack: Police identify suspect as business student
The Columbus Dispatch • Monday November 28, 2016
Monday morning dawned on the Ohio State University campus in positive fashion. Students had just returned after visits home for Thanksgiving weekend. And they were still in a celebratory mood from the Buckeyes’ football win over rival Michigan on Saturday.
Nothing would have prepared anyone for what had happened by late morning.
A student, Ohio State police say, drove a car into a group of people standing outside a campus building, throwing some into the air and running over others. The driver then jumped from the car with a butcher knife, slashing more people. Less than a minute after the attack, an OSU police officer had shot and killed the man. In the end, 11 people were injured.
The suspect has been identified as Abdul Razak Ali Artan, who was a Logistics Management major in the College of Business at Ohio State. Police said they believe he was 18 years old, though other reports have said he was 20. Records show he lived in western Franklin County, in Franklin Township. Records also show that he graduated with honors, with an associate’s degree, from Columbus State Community College in May before transferring this semester to Ohio State.
Police said the officer who shot and killed Artan is Ohio State University Police Officer Alan Horujko, 28, who has been with the police department since January 2015. He wasn’t injured.
Neighbors in the Havenwood Townhome complex just off Georgesville Road, where Artan lived, said police and the sheriff’s office bomb squad have been there since shortly before 11 am., not long after the situation on campus unfolded. Police crime-scene tape surrounds the complex and officers reportedly are working with federal officials from the FBI and Homeland Security to search his apartment.
For a time, officials believed a second suspect might be in the Lane Avenue garage, but they searched it and found no one. They have since said there was only one suspect. Surveillance footage from cameras on campus showed the suspect’s car entering campus at Kenny Road and Woody Hayes Drive, OSU Police Chief Craig Stone said. Other cameras recorded it on Woodruff Drive and on 19th Avenue. “We could tell that the suspect was in the car by himself,” Stone said.
Andrew Thomas, chief medical officer of Ohio State University’s Wexner Medical Center, said that 11 people were hurt in the incident, two of whom were not transported by ambulance but sought medical care on their own later. All are expected to survive.
Of five at Wexner, two have stab wounds, two were hit by the car and one has cuts, Thomas said. One who came later had injuries from the car.
Two more went to OhioHealth Riverside Methodist Hospital, both hit by the car. One has orthopedic injuries and one a skull fracture, Thomas said. At OhioHealth Grant Medical Center, two people were treated for lacerations and one went later with injuries from the car.
One woman was transported to a hospital by a Columbus fire medic with a gunshot wound to her foot, Fire Chief Kevin O’Connor said. Officials haven’t yet said how that happened, but the woman told medics she was running from the incident and called for help after reaching a safe place.
Thomas didn’t release the names of those injured, but said those at Wexner Medical Center included one faculty member, two graduate students and one undergraduate student. He said those at the OhioHealth hospitals included two undergraduates and two graduate students.
The attack happened outside of Watts Hall, at West 19th Street west of College Road, shortly before 10 a.m. Earlier in the morning, the building had been evacuated because of a report of a gas leak. Authorities say the report of a leak had nothing to do with the attack, but was the reason that a police officer was right there when the car hit those outside.
At a news conference, officials said that Horujko had just cleared the scene from the gas-leak alarm when, at 9:52 a.m., he saw a car strike several pedestrians who had been evacuated into the courtyard outside. He issued a radio alert that seven to eight pedestrians had been struck.
He said the driver got out of the car with a large knife and began attacking people, and he ordered the man to drop the knife.
The man refused and, by 9:53 a.m., he had been shot and killed.
Those who knew Artan say they’re shocked. Neighbors said his family had immigrated to the Columbus area from Somalia.
Jack Ouham owns the Hometown Market, which is just around the corner from where Artan lived with his family. He said that Artan came in there once or twice a day and had lived in an apartment with his mother and six or seven siblings.
“I don’t know what made him act like that,” Ouham said. “He don’t drink. He don’t smoke. He don’t use narcotics. They’re very nice people.”
Ohio State’s student newspaper interviewed Artan in August, shortly after he started at Ohio State. Artan talked about moving from Columbus State to such a large school, and being Muslim and the importance of prayer.
“This is my first day. This place is huge and I don’t even know where to pray,” he said. “I wanted to pray in the open, but I was kind of scared with everything going on in the media…I was kind of scared right now. But I just did it. I relied on God. I went to the corner and just prayed.”
After the suspect was identified, Ohio State President Dr. Michael Drake said, “What we really want to do is unify together, support each other.
“Let’s not jump to conclusions and perhaps create a bad situation where one doesn’t exist.”
Hakim Ouham said he often visited his uncle at his store and also knew Artan.
“He’s the last guy I’d expect,” Hakim Ouham said.
Artan also was a frequent customer of the nearby Khyber Restaurant, where he often picked up lamb gyros, said Niaz Siddiqui.
Siddiqui called Artan a “cool guy” who often talked to him about going to college.
Monday night, members of the central Ohio Muslim community gathered at the headquarters for the Center for American-Islamic Relations-Ohio in Dublin to talk about the attack.
Nichol Ghazi said that when she first heard, her reaction was “don’t let it be someone from our community.”
Ghazi, of Galena, offered sympathy for victims of the attack, and wanted the Ohio State community to know they stand with them. Her Muslim faith, she said, is not one that encourages violence, and said that Islam preaches, “‘If you take one life, it’s as if you’ve taken all of humanity. It’s that grievous of a sin.”
“OSU is our home,” added Abdi Dini, a member of the local Somali community. “Any twisted minds that would claim such a sickening act of violence is not a part of us.”
Campus officials have said that classes will continue normally Tuesday.
Around campus Monday night, students held several candlelight vigils and attended religious services.
St. Stephen’s Episcopal Church welcomed about 40 people for a 7 p.m. candlelight vigil led by religious leaders representing several faiths. The Woodruff Avenue church is just down the street from where the attack occurred.
Speakers read Scripture passages and said prayers. Some attendees shared smiles. Others grieved.
The Rev. Karl Stephens, the church’s director of campus ministry, said he hopes all who attended the hourlong event found hope in unity.
“When a burden is borne, it’s better to be borne together than alone,” Stephens said. “During this time of such fear and shock, we need to support and unite our community.”
Students first learned of a problem when an “active shooter” alert was sent at 9:55 a.m. to the campus community, urging people to hide in place.
One 911 caller was outside with classmates after the building was cleared. He saw much of what happened.
“There was a guy who crashed his car into a bunch of people and ran out with a knife chasing down people,” the caller told 911 dispatchers.
The caller moments later, told the dispatcher that the crisis was over. “I think he is dead. I’m looking at him now. Never mind.”
At 11:30 a.m., the university said the scene was secure and that all classes were canceled for the day. The shelter-in-place order was lifted at 11:14 a.m., but more than a dozen buildings remained closed.
U.S. Rep. Joyce Beatty, a Democrat from Jefferson Township, called the campus emergency-alert system “life-saving” and praised OSU officials for instituting it. “Those things don’t just happen,” she said.
Mayor Andrew J. Ginther said it was “one of those days when you’re grateful for good training and great people.” He said police deserve particular credit for handling the incident well in a climate of contentious relations. “There has never been a more complicated and challenging time to be a police officer,” he said.
Ginther made no reference to Artan’s ethnicity or background but said he is proud that Columbus is “warm and welcoming” to immigrants and refugees. “We welcome people from all over the world,” he said.
Columbus police, Ohio State police and deputies with the Franklin County Sheriff’s Office rushed to the scene. Students took to social media to find information, and posted video and pictures to Twitter of the scene.
Mike O’Connell, a senior from Dublin, said he did not hear shots, but got the alerts.
“I just had a class over here an hour ago,” he said. “This is insane. I’ve never seen anything like this.”
Another student said she was in a business class when she received the emergency alert. She said she could see people running outside.
“We’re just staying safe, making sure everyone else is safe,” the sophomore said.
Peter Anderson, chairman of the Department of Materials Science and Engineering, said he arrived at Watts Hall after the attack was over.
He said students told him that someone called in a fluorine leak in the building, which has lab facilities. As required during emergencies, the students congregated in the courtyard outside the building.
He said the attacker drove a car into the courtyard. “It’s where we hold our ice cream socials and when something like this happens,”Anderson said.
One victim was struck so hard that the person flew into the air and landed on a hard surface.
“It sounds very fortunate that bsed on what I heard, if this is not a life-threatening injury,” Anderson said.
Anderson said one of his colleagues, professor emeritus William Clark, was slashed in his lower leg by the attacker.
Upper Arlington and Grandview schools were locked down for a short time while police investigated the incident.
On Tuesday, Ohio State will mark one year since another fatal incident happened on campus. It was a year ago Nov. 29 that Dean Sturgis, a former security guard for the Wexner Center for the Arts, went into that building and started shooting at artwork in the gallery.
The center was evacuated and closed. SWAT officers found Sturgis, 62, dead after he shot himself. No one else was hurt.
Dispatch Reporters Beth Burger, Bill Bush, Theodore Decker, Mary Mogan Edwards, Ken Gordon, Danae King, Kimball Perry, Earl Rinehart, Lucas Sullivan, Jim Weiker, Alissa Widman Neese, Jim Woods and Holly Zachariah contributed to this story.
OHIO STATE ATTACKER IDENTIFIED: Everything We Know About Abdul Razak Ali Artan
CHRISTIAN DATOC
Reporter
The man behind Monday’s horrific attack at Ohio State University has been identified as Abdul Razak Ali Artan.
Ohio law enforcement officials confirmed to NBC News Monday afternoon that Artan — an 18-year-old freshman at OSU — was the man who plowed a car into a crowd of people on campus and subsequently attacked passers-by with a butcher’s knife.
“I wanted to pray in the open, but I was kind of scared with everything going on in the media,” he stated. “I’m a Muslim, it’s not what the media portrays me to be.”
“I don’t blame them,” he cotinued. “It’s the media that put that picture in their heads so they’re just going to have it, and it’s going to make them feel uncomfortable.”
Artan’s motive is not yet known, yet authorities maintain that the attack was “done on purpose” and are treating the incident as a possible terrorist act.
This is a developing situation. Check back for updates.
And do we know exactly who we are
We hold the light but we still listen to the dark
And it tells us that we don’t measure up
And it tells us that we’ll never be enough, tell me
Do we know exactly who we are
We are the light
Light of the world
Light up the night
When will we learn
Now is our time
Now is our turn
To burn baby burn baby
Oh oh oh
Burn baby burn baby
Oh oh oh
Burn baby burn baby
And do we know exactly what we have
Why don’t we let it shine while we have the chance
It’s not so we can earn our place
We shine ‘cause we’ve been saved by grace, tell me
Do we know exactly what we have
We are the light
Light of the world
Light up the night
When will we learn
Now is our time
Now is our turn
To burn baby burn baby
Oh oh oh
Burn baby burn baby
Oh oh oh
Burn baby burn baby
Oh we’re a city on a hillside
So bright keep on shining
Oh take that fire from the inside
Outside keep on burning
We are the light
Light of the world
Light up the night
When will we learn
Now is our time
Now is our turn
To burn baby burn baby
Oh oh oh
Burn baby burn baby
Oh oh oh
Burn baby burn baby
Story 1: Trump Breaks Campaign Promise To American People: “Will Not Pursue Investigation Against Clinton” — Rule of Law For American People — Political Elites Protect Each Other — Height of Hypocrisy — Law and Order vs. Tone and Content — What is next? Republican Touch-back Amnesty (Citizenship) For The 30-50 Million Criminal Illegal Aliens In United States? “Lie, after lie, after lie” — Law Abiding Americans Want Law Enforcement: Clinton Prosecuted and All Illegal Aliens Deported — Videos —
Will Hillary Clinton Be Prosecuted Under Donald Trump? – Intelligence Report (FULL SHOW 11/22/2016)
Trump: Hillary Being Brought To Justice Not Off The Table
Clinton Investigation Not Over Yet – ‘Equal Treatment Under The Law Means Just That’
TRUMP SENIOR ADVISOR: NO PLAN TO PURSUE CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST HILLARY CLINTON
Donald Trump won’t further investigate Hillary Clinton’s private email server
Breaking news Trump aide Kellyanne Conway: No plan to pursue charges against Clinton
Kellyane Conway: Trump Admin Will Not Pursue Investigations of Hillary Email, Foundation
Trump Won’t Pursue Charges Against Hillary Clinton
Rudy Giuliani Responds To Rumors Of Donald Trump Not Pursuing Clinton Investigation | NBC News
Roger Stone: Trump Must Bring Hillary Clinton To Justice
GERALD FORD PARDONS RICHARD NIXON
Can Obama Pardon Hillary If She Hasn’t Been Indicted?” Is Trump Playing Obama?!
Pardons for Hillary & Illegal Foreigners
Donald Trump: Hillary Clinton “guilty as hell” in email investigation
Should Trump rule out prosecuting Clinton?
Will Donald Trump hire a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary Clinton? 11-13-16
‘It’s all in good time’: Kellyanne Conway on if Trump will appoint a special prosecutor for Clinton
CBS: Trump call for special prosecutor ‘strikes fear’ in hearts of Clinton allies
Fmr. AG Ashcroft on Trump threat of special prosecutor
Donald Trump lays out three steps of his immigration policy
Donald Trump explains his immigration plan
Trump’s Touchback amnesty explained by Marc Thiessen
Donald Trump explains his immigration plan
Donald Trump will deport illegal immigrants
Rep Steve King discusses Trump’s touchback amnesty
Immigration by the Numbers — Off the Charts
Immigration, World Poverty and Gumballs – NumbersUSA.com
How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the US? – Walsh – 1
How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the US? – Walsh – 2
Chaffetz rips DHS release of criminal illegal immigrants
Jason Chaffetz shreds Sarah Saldana
Trey Gowdy goes after ICE Director Sarah Saldana
Giuliani on Trump Not Pursuing Clinton Investigations: ‘He Made the Choice to Unite the Nation’
Tuesday on CNN’s “Newsroom,” while reacting to the news that President-elect Donald Trump will not pursue further investigations into former Secretary of State and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, former mayor of New York City Rudy Giuliani said, “He made the choice to unite the nation.”
Giuliani said,”Look, there’s tradition in American politics that after you win an election, you sort of put things behind you. If that’s the decision he reached, that’s perfectly consistent with sort of the historical pattern of things come up, you say a lot of things, even some bad things might happen, and then you sort of put it behind you in order to unite the nation. So if he made that decision, I would be supportive. I’d also be supportive of continuing the investigation. I think the president-elect had a tough choice there. He made the choice to unite the nation. I think all those people who did vote against him maybe can take another look at him.”
Why political professionals are struggling to make sense of the world they created.
Donald Trump supporters at a Nevada caucus, Feb. 23. PHOTO: ETHAN MILLER/GETTY IMAGES
By PEGGY NOONAN
Feb. 25, 2016 8:02 p.m. ET
We’re in a funny moment. Those who do politics for a living, some of them quite brilliant, are struggling to comprehend the central fact of the Republican primary race, while regular people have already absorbed what has happened and is happening. Journalists and politicos have been sharing schemes for how Marco parlays a victory out of winning nowhere, or Ted roars back, or Kasich has to finish second in Ohio. But in my experience any nonpolitical person on the street, when asked who will win, not only knows but gets a look as if you’re teasing him. Trump, they say.
I had such a conversation again Tuesday with a friend who repairs shoes in a shop on Lexington Avenue. Jimmy asked me, conversationally, what was going to happen. I deflected and asked who he thinks is going to win. “Troomp!” He’s a very nice man, an elderly, old-school Italian-American, but I saw impatience flick across his face: Aren’t you supposed to know these things?
In America now only normal people are capable of seeing the obvious.
But actually that’s been true for a while, and is how we got in the position we’re in.
Last October I wrote of the five stages of Trump, based on the Kübler-Ross stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. Most of the professionals I know are stuck somewhere between four and five.
But I keep thinking of how Donald Trump got to be the very likely Republican nominee. There are many answers and reasons, but my thoughts keep revolving around the idea of protection. It is a theme that has been something of a preoccupation in this space over the years, but I think I am seeing it now grow into an overall political dynamic throughout the West.
There are the protected and the unprotected. The protected make public policy. The unprotected live in it. The unprotected are starting to push back, powerfully.
The protected are the accomplished, the secure, the successful—those who have power or access to it. They are protected from much of the roughness of the world. More to the point, they are protected from the world they have created. Again, they make public policy and have for some time.
I want to call them the elite to load the rhetorical dice, but let’s stick with the protected.
They are figures in government, politics and media. They live in nice neighborhoods, safe ones. Their families function, their kids go to good schools, they’ve got some money. All of these things tend to isolate them, or provide buffers. Some of them—in Washington it is important officials in the executive branch or on the Hill; in Brussels, significant figures in the European Union—literally have their own security details.
Because they are protected they feel they can do pretty much anything, impose any reality. They’re insulated from many of the effects of their own decisions.
One issue obviously roiling the U.S. and Western Europe is immigration. It is the issue of the moment, a real and concrete one but also a symbolic one: It stands for all the distance between governments and their citizens.
It is of course the issue that made Donald Trump.
Britain will probably leave the European Union over it. In truth immigration is one front in that battle, but it is the most salient because of the European refugee crisis and the failure of the protected class to address it realistically and in a way that offers safety to the unprotected.
If you are an unprotected American—one with limited resources and negligible access to power—you have absorbed some lessons from the past 20 years’ experience of illegal immigration. You know the Democrats won’t protect you and the Republicans won’t help you. Both parties refused to control the border. The Republicans were afraid of being called illiberal, racist, of losing a demographic for a generation. The Democrats wanted to keep the issue alive to use it as a wedge against the Republicans and to establish themselves as owners of the Hispanic vote.
Many Americans suffered from illegal immigration—its impact on labor markets, financial costs, crime, the sense that the rule of law was collapsing. But the protected did fine—more workers at lower wages. No effect of illegal immigration was likely to hurt them personally.
It was good for the protected. But the unprotected watched and saw. They realized the protected were not looking out for them, and they inferred that they were not looking out for the country, either.
The unprotected came to think they owed the establishment—another word for the protected—nothing, no particular loyalty, no old allegiance.
Mr. Trump came from that.
Similarly in Europe, citizens on the ground in member nations came to see the EU apparatus as a racket—an elite that operated in splendid isolation, looking after its own while looking down on the people.
In Germany the incident that tipped public opinion against Chancellor Angela Merkel’s liberal refugee policy happened on New Year’s Eve in the public square of Cologne. Packs of men said to be recent migrants groped and molested groups of young women. It was called a clash of cultures, and it was that, but it was also wholly predictable if any policy maker had cared to think about it. And it was not the protected who were the victims—not a daughter of EU officials or members of the Bundestag. It was middle- and working-class girls—the unprotected, who didn’t even immediately protest what had happened to them. They must have understood that in the general scheme of things they’re nobodies.
What marks this political moment, in Europe and the U.S., is the rise of the unprotected. It is the rise of people who don’t have all that much against those who’ve been given many blessings and seem to believe they have them not because they’re fortunate but because they’re better.
You see the dynamic in many spheres. In Hollywood, as we still call it, where they make our rough culture, they are careful to protect their own children from its ill effects. In places with failing schools, they choose not to help them through the school liberation movement—charter schools, choice, etc.—because they fear to go up against the most reactionary professional group in America, the teachers unions. They let the public schools flounder. But their children go to the best private schools.
This is a terrible feature of our age—that we are governed by protected people who don’t seem to care that much about their unprotected fellow citizens.
And a country really can’t continue this way.
In wise governments the top is attentive to the realities of the lives of normal people, and careful about their anxieties. That’s more or less how America used to be. There didn’t seem to be so much distance between the top and the bottom.
Now is seems the attitude of the top half is: You’re on your own. Get with the program, little racist.
Social philosophers are always saying the underclass must re-moralize. Maybe it is the overclass that must re-moralize.
I don’t know if the protected see how serious this moment is, or their role in it.
Each year the Border Patrol apprehends hundreds of thousands of aliens who flagrantly violate our nation’s laws by unlawfully crossing U.S. borders. Such illegal entry is a misdemeanor, and, if repeated after being deported, becomes punishable as a felony.
The illegal alien population is composed of those who illegally enter the country (referred to as “entry without inspection — EWI”) in violation of the immigration law, and others enter legally and then sty illegally (referred to as overstayers). The immigration authorities currently estimate that two-thirds to three-fifths of all illegal immigrants are EWIs and the remainder is overstayers. Both types of illegal immigrants are deportable under Immigration and Nationality Act Section 237 (a)(1)(B) which says: “Any alien who is present in the United States in violation of this Act or any other law of the United States is deportable.”
Illegal Immigration Is Not A Victimless Crime
Apologists for illegal immigration try to paint it as a victimless crime, but the fact is that illegal immigration causes substantial harm to American citizens and legal immigrants, particularly those in the most vulnerable sectors of our population — the poor, minorities, and children.
Illegal immigration causes an enormous drain on public funds. The seminal study of the costs of immigration by the National Academy of Sciences found that the taxes paid by immigrants do not begin to cover the cost of services received by them.1 The quality of education, health care and other services for Americans are undermined by the needs of endless numbers of poor, unskilled illegal entrants.
Additionally, job competition by waves of illegal immigrants desperate for any job unfairly depresses the wages and working conditions offered to American workers, hitting hardest at minority workers and those without high school degrees.
Illegal Immigration And Population Growth
Illegal immigration also contributes to the dramatic population growth overwhelming communities across America — crowding school classrooms, consuming already limited affordable housing, and increasing the strain on precious natural resources like water, energy, and forestland. Until the recent economic recession and high unemployment, the immigration authorities estimated that the population of illegal aliens was increasing by an estimated half million people annually.
Illegal Immigration Undermines National Security
While most illegal immigrants may come only to seek work and a better economic opportunity, their presence outside the law furnishes an opportunity for terrorists to blend into the same shadows while they target the American public for their terrorist crimes. Some people advocate giving illegal aliens legal status to bring them out of the shadows, but, if we accommodate illegal immigration by offering legal status, this will be seen abroad as a message that we condone illegal immigration, and we will forever be faced with the problem.
Border Patrol: Necessary But Not Sufficient
The Border Patrol plays a crucial role in combating illegal immigration, but illegal immigration cannot be controlled solely at the border. The overstayers as well as the EWIs who get past the Border Patrol must be identified and removed by the interior immigration inspectors of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Today, the policies of the Obama administration are working at cross purposes to this objective. ICE is constrained from detaining and deporting most illegal aliens they encounter with the exception of those with criminal convictions or threats to the national security.
What Can Be Done?
There must be a comprehensive effort to end illegal immigration. That requires ensuring that illegal aliens will not be able to obtain employment, public assistance benefits, public education, public housing, or any other taxpayer-funded benefit without detection.
The three major components of immigration control — deterrence, apprehension and removal — need to be strengthened by Congress and the Executive Branch if effective control is ever to be reestablished. Controlling illegal immigration requires a balanced approach with a full range of enforcement improvements that go far beyond the border. These include many procedural reforms, beefed up investigation capacity, asylum reform, documents improvements, major improvements in detention and deportation procedures, limitations on judicial review, improved intelligence capacity, greatly improved state/federal cooperation, and added resources.
What About The Costs?
Effective control and management of the laws against illegal immigration require adequate resources. But those costs will be more than offset by savings to states, counties, communities, and school districts across the nation.
“The New Americans: Economic, Demographic, and Fiscal Effects of Immigration,” National Research Council, 1997
Federal Bureau of Investigation Seal. The FBI is the main agency responsible for investigating and prosecuting federal offenses.
In the United States, a federal crime or federal offense is an act that is made illegal by U.S. federal legislation. Prosecution happens at both the federal and the state levels (based on the Dual sovereignty doctrine); thus a “federal crime” is one that is prosecuted under federal criminal law, and not under a state’s criminal law, under which most of the crimes committed in the United States are prosecuted.
This includes many acts that, if they did not occur on U.S. federal property or on Indian reservations or were not specifically penalized, would otherwise not be crimes or fall under state or local law. Some crimes are listed in Title 18 of the United States Code (the federal criminal and penal code), but others fall under other titles; for instance, tax evasion and possession of weapons banned by the National Firearms Act are criminalized in Title 26 of the United States Code.
In drug-related federal offenses mandatory minimums can be enforced. Federal law is implicated when a defendant manufactures, sells, imports/exports, traffic, or cultivate illegal controlled substances across state boundaries or national borders.[citation needed] A mandatory minimum is a federally regulated minimum sentence for offenses of certain drugs.[3]
The President-elect shares an update on the Presidential Transition, an outline of some of his policy plans for the first 100 days, and his day one executive actions.
Breaking News: New Video: Trump Lays out Agenda For First 100 Days. #Breaking
Donald Trump Lays Out His Plan For His First 100 Days In Office – Laura Ingraham – Hannity
Keiser Report: Trumpocalypse (E996)
Why Democrats want Bannon out of Trump’s cabinet
The Untruth About Steve Bannon | Donald Trump’s Chief Strategist
Best Steve Bannon Speech
Trump Hires The “A” Team, While Hillary Keeps On Blaming Everybody But Herself
Kimberley Strassel’s Interview w/Steve Bannon
Glenn Beck CNN Full Interview on Steve Bannon – “The Alt Right Movement is Real”
Steve Bannon “must be a good guy if liberals hate him so much”
CLINTON CASH — Director’s Cut — FULL OFFICIAL MOVIE — Bill & Hillary Clinton´s Blur exposed
Two things are missing from Trump’s preview of his first 100 days in the White House
BRYAN LOGAN Nov 22nd 2016 6:36AM
President-elect Donald Trump just offered a preview of his first 100 days in office.
Trump appeared in a YouTube video on Monday outlining a number of policies he says his administration will seek to enact after he is inaugurated in January.
The message closely resembled the pitch from his days on the campaign trail, highlighting his goal to preserve American jobs and bolster US military defenses.
Here’s a list of the initiatives Trump says he wants to pursue starting on day one:
US trade — issue a notice of intent to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
US energy — cancel what Trump described as “job-killing” restrictions on American energy production.
Regulations — the incoming president says he will seek to formulate a simple rule: for every one new regulation, two old regulations would be eliminated.
National security — Trump says he will ask the Department of Defense to develop policies that protect US infrastructure from cyber attacks and “all other forms of attacks.”
Immigration — ask the Department of Labor to investigate abuses of visa programs that “undercut the American worker.”
Ethics reform — a 5- year ban on executive officials becoming lobbyists after they leave the administration and a lifetime ban on the same officials lobbying on behalf of foreign governments.
Two things were missing from Trump’s message — a mention of a border wall that he vowed to build between the US and Mexico, and details on his proposed alternative to the Affordable Care Act.
he border wall was one of Trump’s signature campaign promises and an extension of an immigration platform that sought to deport millions of people who are in the US illegally.
On the Affordable Care Act — better-known as Obamacare — then-candidate Trump promised to “repeal and replace” the law as soon as he took office.
It is unclear when those initiatives might be taken up. After Trump’s first meeting with President Barack Obama days after the election, Trump signaled that he may keep some Obamacare provisions in place.
Additionally, Trump’s promise on Monday to push for ethics reform comes on the same day that his labyrinthine foreign business connections were called into question. Last week, amid a flurry of meetings with domestic and international dignitaries, the billionaire mogul also sat down with three Indian business partners who are building a Trump-branded apartment complex near Mumbai.
According to The New York Times, a Trump Organization spokeswoman described the meeting as a “courtesy call.”
Trump, who has grown increasingly hostile toward news organizations since he was elected, appeared to address that issue in a tweet late Monday night. The message claimed that it was “well known” that he has business dealings around the world. “Only the crooked media makes this a big deal,” the tweet read.
The Trump adviser talks about the winning campaign and says the political attacks against him and Breitbart News are ‘just nonsense.’
By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL
Nov. 18, 2016 6:52 p.m. ET
It’s hard to think of Steve Bannon as a low-profile guy. He has garnered about as many headlines over the past week as Donald Trump—no small feat. He is the executive chairman of the hard-right Breitbart News, among the most aggressive voices online, its website an attack machine against Democrats and “establishment” conservatives. President-elect Trump chose Mr. Bannon this week as his chief strategist and senior counselor, a slot usually filed by someone eager to play a presidential surrogate on TV.
Yet Mr. Bannon—who joined the Trump campaign in mid-August to propel its thunderbolt victory—professes no interest in being the story. “It’s not important to be known,” he says in a telephone interview Thursday night, among his first public comments since the election. “It was Lao Tzu who said that with the best leaders, when the work is accomplished, the people will say ‘We have done this ourselves.’ That’s how I’ve led.”
Nor does he profess to care that Democrats and the media are portraying him as a “cloven-hoofed devil,” as he puts it. “I pride myself in doing things that matter. What mattered in the campaign was winning. We did. What matters now is pulling together the single best team we can to implement President-elect Trump’s vision.
He continues: “How can you take anything seriously from a media apparatus—paid the amount of money you people are paid—that systematically missed something that was so obvious, that missed Brexit, that missed the Trump revolution? You’d have thought they’d have learned their lesson on November 8.”
Slight pause. “They clearly haven’t.”
Here are a few things you’ve likely read about Steve Bannon this week: He’s a white supremacist, a bigot and anti-Semite. He’s a self-described Leninist who wants to “destroy the state.” He’s associated with the “alt-right,” a movement that, according to the New York Times, delights in “harassing Jews, Muslims and other vulnerable groups by spewing shocking insults on social media.”
You’ll have seen some of Breitbart’s more offensive headlines, which refer to “renegade” Jews and the “dangerous faggot tour.” You maybe heard that Breitbart is gearing up to be a Pravda-like state organ for the Trump administration.
Mr. Bannon is an aggressive political scrapper, unabashed in his views, but he says those views bear no relation to the media’s description. Over 70 minutes, he describes himself as a “conservative,” a “populist” and an “economic nationalist.” He’s a talker, but unexcitable, speaking in measured tones. A former naval officer, he thinks in military terms and likes to quote philosophers and generals. He’s contemptuous of the media, proud of Breitbart, protective of the “deplorables,” and—at least at the moment—eager to work with everyone from soon-to-be White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus to House Speaker Paul Ryan.
At first Mr. Bannon insists that he has no interest in “wasting time” addressing the accusations against him. Yet he’s soon ticking off the reasons they are “just nonsense.”
Anti-Semitic? “Breitbart is the most pro-Israel site in the United States of America. I have Breitbart Jerusalem, which I have Aaron Klein run with about 10 reporters there. We’ve been leaders in stopping this BDS movement”—meaning boycott, divestment and sanctions—“in the United States; we’re a leader in the reporting of young Jewish students being harassed on American campuses; we’ve been a leader on reporting on the terrible plight of the Jews in Europe.” He adds that given his many Jewish partners and writers, “guys like Joel Pollak, these claims of anti-Semitism just aren’t serious. It’s a joke.”
He blames the attacks on a lazy media, noting for instance that the “renegade Jew” line wasn’t Breitbart’s. Conservative activist David Horowitz (also Jewish) has taken responsibility for writing the headline himself, in a piece about Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol.
The Lenin anecdote came from an article in the Daily Beast by a writer who claimed to have spoken with Mr. Bannon in 2013: “So a guy I’ve never heard of in my life claims he met me at a party, and then claims I said something about Lenin, and this is taken as gospel truth, with nobody checking it.”
What about the charge of white supremacism? “I’m an economic nationalist. I am an America first guy. And I have admired nationalist movements throughout the world, have said repeatedly strong nations make great neighbors. I’ve also said repeatedly that the ethno-nationalist movement, prominent in Europe, will change over time. I’ve never been a supporter of ethno-nationalism.”
Mr. Bannon says the accusations miss that “the black working and middle class and the Hispanic working and middle class, just like whites, have been severely hurt by the policies of globalism.” He adds that he urged candidate Trump to reach out in his campaigning. “I was the one who said we are going to Flint, Michigan, we are going to black churches in Cleveland, because the thrust of this movement is that we are going to bring capitalism to the inner cities.”
Why does he think that leftists are so fixated on him? “They were ready to coronateHillary Clinton. That didn’t happen, and I’m one of the reasons why. So, by the way, I wear these attacks as an emblem of pride.”
Mr. Bannon is fiercely proud of the bomb-throwing Breitbart News, too. He credits it with “catching and understanding this populist movement” as far back as 2013, narrating the rise of the UK Independence Party in Britain, the exit movement for Scotland, and ultimately Brexit. “We were on to this change years before Donald Trump came on the scene,” he says.
He acknowledges that the site is “edgy” but insists it is “vibrant.” He offers his own definition of the alt-right movement and explains how he sees it fitting into Breitbart. “Our definition of the alt-right is younger people who are anti-globalists, very nationalist, terribly anti-establishment.”
But he says Breitbart is also a platform for “libertarians,” Zionists, “the conservative gay community,” “proponents of restrictions on gay marriage,” “economic nationalism” and “populism” and “the anti-establishment.” In other words, the site hosts many views. “We provide an outlet for 10 or 12 or 15 lines of thought—we set it up that way” and the alt-right is “a tiny part of that.” Yes, he concedes, the alt-right has “some racial and anti-Semitic overtones.” He makes clear he has zero tolerance for such views.
All this said, Mr. Bannon explains he’s on sabbatical from Breitbart and has had “nothing to do with the site since August 15,” when he joined the Trump campaign. Now he will take an “extended leave of absence and cut all association with the site while I’m working at the pleasure of the president.” He adds that Breitbart “didn’t get a scoop from the campaign from the minute I took over; they’ve had to scramble like everybody else.”
Yet given its loyalty to Messrs. Bannon and Trump, won’t Breitbart serve as an attack dog against Republicans who defy the new president? Mr. Bannon says he believes the site will “call it as it sees it” and that even the Trump administration will be open for criticism if it doesn’t “stay true to its vision.” He adds: “If we don’t, I assume they will hammer us.”
As for how Breitbart will treat other Republicans: “Do I see them jumping in and backing Paul Ryan? Probably not. But I have no control over that. I’m sure if you look at some of the names being rumored for positions, walking through Trump tower, folks like [South Carolina Gov.] Nikki Haley, and you look at the comments section of Breitbart, I’m sure they aren’t exactly high-fiving. But that’s fantastic. The reason that Breitbart has gotten so big is because it has spirit.”
Mr. Bannon’s role in the Trump campaign was never made clear, though fellow adviser Kellyanne Conway called him the campaign’s “general” and a “brilliant tactician.” Mr. Bannon describes a close alliance of himself, Ms. Conway and Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, who developed a very “tight strategy” that relied on targeted speeches, rallies and social media. They envisioned two possible paths to the White House: one that hinged on Nevada and New Hampshire; the other that “leveraged Ohio” and rolled up Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin. By the last week they saw the latter plan coming together.
The claim that the Trump campaign was chaotic in the final months is wrong, Mr. Bannon says. It benefited from “excellent data” furnished by the Republican National Committee and an operation in San Antonio set up by Mr. Kushner. The campaign was looking closely at “rural communities and the hinterlands that held a lot of votes,” which the Clinton campaign had “basically ceded” to Republicans. Mrs. Clinton also made the mistake of trying to “close the deal on a coalition” (minorities, millennials) that “she’d never closed on before.”
Mrs. Clinton aside, the reason Mr. Trump won, he says, “is not all that complicated. The data was overwhelming: This is a change election. People weren’t happy with the direction of the country. So all you had to do was to give people permission to vote for Donald Trump as an agent of change, make sure he articulated that message.” That, and paint Mrs. Clinton as “the guardian of a corrupt and incompetent elite and status quo.” Mr. Bannon believes Mr. Trump to be uniquely suited to make the case, as “one of the best political orators in American history, rated with William Jennings Bryan.”
Now it’s a new world, and given his reputation it is interesting to hear Mr. Bannon talk about what he is “most proud of.” One thing is that “you see nothing but unity on the Republican side. I like saying that, having been a very anti-establishment leader of a very anti-establishment movement, that we were able to come together with people like Reince Priebus, to overcome our differences in a coalition. To have this great victory and realize that if we are going to put the policies of a President Trump into effect, we’ve got to continue to work as a coalition.”
His affinity for Mr. Priebus (“a terrific partner”) seems real, and he says bluntly that the Trump victory “would not have been possible without the RNC”—though he adds with a rare chuckle that the RNC “was a little anxious at times.” Mr. Bannon brushes off concerns that there will be a White House power struggle between him and Mr. Priebus, given that Mr. Trump says the two men will be “equal partners.”
“Listen, this is not Bush 41 or Bush 43 or Mitt Romney. This is a President-elect who gets information directly. He works in concentric circles.”
Mr. Bannon has confidence about passing big reforms. “Does Paul Ryan think that everything Breitbart stands for, Steve Bannon stands for, is great? No. Do I think that everything he stands for—in particular his omnibus [spending bill]—is great? No. Can we work together to implement Donald Trump’s vision for America? Can we do that? Oh yeah.”
He concedes that “there are going to be times when we really, really disagree.” But those are “in the future” and for now the priorities (tax reform, ObamaCare) “that we’re working 24 hours a day on here with Vice President-elect Pence, who is going to be our connection to Capitol Hill,” are energizing everyone.
He’s proud of the “broad scope of people” they are bringing in for talks: Ms. Haley, Mitt Romney. He’s proud that the first job offer—to former Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn for national security adviser—went to a “registered Democrat,” and that the country is going to see “a lot of interesting choices.” Mr. Trump “knows how to mix and match, get the best out of people, and I think it says something about what a historic figure he could be.”
As for Mr. Bannon, don’t expect to see him on cable. “People say get out there. But I see no purpose in trying to convince a bunch of media elites who only ever talk to themselves. I never went on TV one time during the campaign. Not once. You know why? Because politics is war. General Sherman would never have gone on TV to tell everyone his plans. I’d never tip my hand to the other side. And right now we’ve got work to do.”
Ms. Strassel is a member of the Journal editorial board and writes the Potomac Watch column.
Donald Trump’s New York Times Interview: Full Transcript
Following is a transcript of President-elect Donald J. Trump’s interview on Tuesday with reporters, editors and opinion columnists from The New York Times. The transcription was prepared by Liam Stack, Jonah Engel Bromwich, Karen Workman and Tim Herrera of The Times.
ARTHUR SULZBERGER Jr., publisher of The New York Times: Thank you very much for joining us. And I want to reaffirm this is on the record.
DONALD J. TRUMP, President-elect of the United States: O.K.
SULZBERGER: All right, so we’re clear. We had a very nice meeting in the Churchill Room. You’re a Churchill fan, I hear?
TRUMP: I am, I am.
SULZBERGER: There’s a photo of the great man behind you.
TRUMP: There was a big thing about the bust that was removed out of the Oval Office.
SULZBERGER: I heard you’re thinking of putting it back.
TRUMP: I am, indeed. I am.
SULZBERGER: Wonderful. So we’ve got a good collection here from our newsroom and editorial and our columnists. I just want to say we had a good, quiet, but useful and well-meaning conversation in there. So I appreciate that very much.
TRUMP: I appreciate it, too.
SULZBERGER: I thought maybe I’d start this off by asking if you have anything you would like to start this off with before we move to the easiest questions you’re going to get this administration.
[laughter]
TRUMP: O.K. Well, I just appreciate the meeting and I have great respect for The New York Times. Tremendous respect. It’s very special. Always has been very special. I think I’ve been treated very rough. It’s well out there that I’ve been treated extremely unfairly in a sense, in a true sense. I wouldn’t only complain about The Times. I would say The Times was about the roughest of all. You could make the case The Washington Post was bad, but every once in a while I’d actually get a good article. Not often, Dean, but every once in awhile.
Look, I have great respect for The Times, and I’d like to turn it around. I think it would make the job I am doing much easier. We’re working very hard. We have great people coming in. I think you’ll be very impressed with the names. We’ll be announcing some very shortly.
Everybody wanted to do this. People are giving up tremendous careers in order to be subject to you folks and subject to a lot of other folks. But they’re giving up a lot. I mean some are giving up tremendous businesses in order to sit for four or maybe eight or whatever the period of time is. But I think we’re going to see some tremendous talent, tremendous talent coming in. We have many people for every job. I mean no matter what the job is, we have many incredible people. I think, Reince, you can sort of just confirm that. The quality of the people is very good.
REINCE PRIEBUS, Mr. Trump’s choice for chief of staff: [inaudible]
TRUMP: We’re trying very hard to get the best people. Not necessarily people that will be the most politically correct people, because that hasn’t been working. So we have really experts in the field. Some are known and some are not known, but they’re known within their field as being the best. That’s very important to me.
You know, I’ve been given a great honor. It’s been very tough. It’s been 18 months of brutality in a true sense, but we won it. We won it pretty big. The final numbers are coming out. Or I guess they’re coming out. Michigan’s just being confirmed. But the numbers are coming out far beyond what anybody’s wildest expectation was. I don’t know if it was us, I mean, we were seeing the kind of crowds and kind of, everything, the kind of enthusiasm we were getting from the people.
As you probably know, I did many, many speeches that last four-week period. I was just telling Arthur that I went around and did speeches in the pretty much 11 different places, that were, the massive crowds we were getting. If we had a stadium that held — and most of you, many of you were there — that held 20,000 people, we’d have 15,000 people outside that couldn’t get in.
So we came up with a good system — we put up the big screens outside with a very good loudspeaker system and very few people left. I would do, during the last month, two or three a day. That’s a lot. Because that’s not easy when you have big crowds. Those speeches, that’s not an easy way of life, doing three a day. Then I said the last two days, I want to do six and seven. And I’m not sure anybody has ever done that. But we did six and we did seven and the last one ended at 1 o’clock in the morning in Michigan.
And we had 31,000 people, 17,000 or 18,000 inside and the rest outside. This massive place in Grand Rapids, I guess. And it was an incredible thing. And I left saying: ‘How do we lose Michigan? I don’t think we can lose Michigan.’
And the reason I did that, it was set up only a little while before — because we heard that day that Hillary was hearing that they’re going to lose Michigan, which hasn’t been lost in 38 years. Or something. But 38 years. And they didn’t want to lose Michigan. So they went out along with President Obama and Michelle, Bill and Hillary, they went to Michigan late that, sort of late afternoon and I said, ‘Let’s go to Michigan.’
It wasn’t on the schedule. So I finished up in New Hampshire and at 10 o’clock I went to Michigan. We got there at 12 o’clock. We started speaking around 12:45, actually, and we had 31,000 people and I said, really, I mean, there are things happening. But we saw it everywhere.
So we felt very good. we had great numbers. And we thought we’re going to win. We thought we were going to win Florida. We thought we were going to win North Carolina. We did easily, pretty easily. We thought strongly we were going to win Pennsylvania. The problem is nobody had won it and it was known, as you know, the great state that always got away. Every Republican thought they were going to win Pennsylvania for 38 years and they just couldn’t win it.
And I thought we were going to win it. And we won it, we won it, you know, relatively easily, we won it by a number of points. Florida we won by 180,000 — was that the number, 180?
PRIEBUS: [inaudible]
TRUMP: More than 180,000 voted, and votes are still coming in from the military, which we are getting about 85 percent of.
So we won that by a lot of votes and, you know, we had a great victory. We had a great victory. I think it would have been easier because I see every once in awhile somebody says, ‘Well, the popular vote.’ Well, the popular vote would have been a lot easier, but it’s a whole different campaign. I would have been in California, I would have been in Texas, Florida and New York, and we wouldn’t have gone anywhere else. Which is, I mean I’d rather do the popular vote from the standpoint — I’d think we’d do actually as well or better — it’s a whole different campaign. It’s like, if you’re a golfer, it’s like match play versus stroke play. It’s a whole different game.
But I think the popular vote would have been easier in a true sense because you’d go to a few places. I think that’s the genius of the Electoral College. I was never a fan of the Electoral College until now.
SULZBERGER: Until now.
[laughter]
TRUMP: Until now. I guess now I like it for two reasons. What it does do is it gets you out to see states that you’ll never see otherwise. It’s very interesting. Like Maine. I went to Maine four times. I went to Maine 2 for one, because everybody was saying you can get to 269 but there is no path to 270. We learned that was false because we ended up with what, three-something.
PRIEBUS: I’ve got to get, we’ve got to get Michigan in.
TRUMP: But there is no path to 270, you have to get the one in Maine, so we kept going back to Maine and we did get the one in Maine. We kept going to Maine 2, and we went to a lot of states that you wouldn’t spend a lot of time in and it does get you — we actually went to about 22 states, whereas if you’re going for popular vote, you’d probably go to four, or three, it could be three. You wouldn’t leave New York. You’d stay in New York and you’d stay in California. So there’s a certain genius about it. And I like it either way. But it’s sort of interesting.
But we had an amazing period of time. I got to know the country, we have a great country, we’re a great, great people, and the enthusiasm was really incredible. The Los Angeles Times had a poll which was interesting because I was always up in that poll. They had something that is, I guess, a modern-day technique in polling, it was called enthusiasm. They added an enthusiasm factor and my people had great enthusiasm, and Hillary’s people didn’t have enthusiasm. And in the end she didn’t get the African-American vote and we ended up close to 15 points, as you know. We started off at one, we ended up with almost 15. And more importantly, a lot of people didn’t show up, because the African-American community liked me. They liked what I was saying.
So they didn’t necessarily vote for me, but they didn’t show up, which was a big problem that she had. I ended up doing very well with women, which was — which I never understood why I was doing poorly, because we’d go to the rallies and we’d have so many women holding up signs, “Women for Trump.” But I kept reading polls saying that I’m not doing well with women. I think whoever is doing it here would say that we did very well with women, especially certain women.
DEAN BAQUET, executive editor of The New York Times: As you describe it, you did do something really remarkable. You energized a lot of people in the country who really wanted change in Washington. But along with that — and this is going to create a tricky thing for you — you also energized presumably a smaller number of people who were evidenced at the alt-right convention in Washington this weekend. Who have a very …
TRUMP: I just saw that today.
BAQUET: So, I’d love to hear you talk about how you’re going to manage that group of people who actually may not be the larger group but who have an expectation for you and are angry about the country and its — along racial lines. My first question is, do you feel like you said things that energized them in particular, and how are you going to manage that?
TRUMP: I don’t think so, Dean. First of all, I don’t want to energize the group. I’m not looking to energize them. I don’t want to energize the group, and I disavow the group. They, again, I don’t know if it’s reporting or whatever. I don’t know where they were four years ago, and where they were for Romney and McCain and all of the other people that ran, so I just don’t know, I had nothing to compare it to.
But it’s not a group I want to energize, and if they are energized I want to look into it and find out why.
What we do want to do is we want to bring the country together, because the country is very, very divided, and that’s one thing I did see, big league. It’s very, very divided, and I’m going to work very hard to bring the country together.
I mean, I’m somebody that really has gotten along with people over the years. It was interesting, my wife, I went to a big event about two years ago. Just after I started thinking about politics.
And we’re walking in and some people were cheering and some people were booing, and she said, you know, ‘People have never booed for you.’
I’ve never had a person boo me, and all of a sudden people are booing me. She said, that’s never happened before. And, it’s politics. You know, all of a sudden they think I’m going to be running for office, and I’m a Republican, let’s say. So it’s something that I had never experienced before and I said, ‘Those people are booing,’ and she said, ‘Yup.’ They’d never booed before. But now they boo. You know, it was a group and another group was going the opposite.
No, I want to bring the country together. It’s very important to me. We’re in a very divided country. In many ways divided.
BAQUET: So I’m going to do that thing that executive editors get to do which is to invite reporters to jump in and ask questions.
MAGGIE HABERMAN, political reporter: I’ll start, thank you, Dean. Mr. President, I’d like to thank you for being here. This morning, Kellyanne Conway talked about not prosecuting Hillary Clinton. We were hoping you could talk about exactly what that means — does that mean just the emails, or the emails and the foundation, and how you came to that decision.
Photo
Mr. Trump leaving The New York Times after meeting with reporters, editors and the publisher, Arthur Sulzberger Jr., on Tuesday.CreditTodd Heisler/The New York Times
TRUMP: Well, there was a report that somebody said that I’m not enthused about it. Look, I want to move forward, I don’t want to move back. And I don’t want to hurt the Clintons. I really don’t.
She went through a lot. And suffered greatly in many different ways. And I am not looking to hurt them at all. The campaign was vicious. They say it was the most vicious primary and the most vicious campaign. I guess, added together, it was definitely the most vicious; probably, I assume you sold a lot of newspapers.
[laughter]
I would imagine. I would imagine. I’m just telling you, Maggie, I’m not looking to hurt them. I think they’ve been through a lot. They’ve gone through a lot.
I’m really looking … I think we have to get the focus of the country into looking forward.
SULZBERGER: If I could interject, we had a good conversation there, you and I, and it was off the record, but there was nothing secret, just wanted to make sure. The idea of looking forward was one of the themes that you were saying. That we need to now get past the election, right?
MATTHEW PURDY, deputy managing editor: So you’re definitively taking that off the table? The investigation?
TRUMP: No, but the question was asked.
PURDY: About the emails and the foundation?
TRUMP: No, no, but it’s just not something that I feel very strongly about. I feel very strongly about health care. I feel very strongly about an immigration bill that I think even the people in this room can be happy. You know, you’ve been talking about immigration bills for 50 years and nothing’s ever happened.
I feel very strongly about an immigration bill that’s fair and just and a lot of other things. There are a lot of things I feel strongly about. I’m not looking to look back and go through this. This was a very painful period. This was a very painful election with all of the email things and all of the foundation things and all of the everything that they went through and the whole country went through. This was a very painful period of time. I read recently where it was, it was, they’re saying, they used to say it was Lincoln against whoever and none of us were there to see it. And there aren’t a lot of recordings of that, right?
[laughter]
But the fact is that there were some pretty vicious elections; they say this was, this was the most.
They say it was definitely the most vicious primary. And I think it’s very important to look forward.
CAROLYN RYAN, senior editor for politics: Do you think it would disappoint your supporters who seemed very animated by the idea of accountability in the Clintons? What would you say to them?
TRUMP: I don’t think they will be disappointed. I think I will explain it, that we have to, in many ways save our country.
Because our country’s really in bad, big trouble. We have a lot of trouble. A lot of problems. And one of the big problems, I talk about, divisiveness. I think that a lot of people will appreciate … I’m not doing it for that reason. I’m doing it because it’s time to go in a different direction. There was a lot of pain, and I think that the people that supported me with such enthusiasm, where they will show up at 1 in the morning to hear a speech.
It was actually Election Day, they showed up at, so that was essentially Election Day. Yeah, I think they’d understand very completely.
THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN, opinion columnist: Mr. President-elect, can I ask a question? One of the issues that you actually were very careful not to speak about during the campaign, and haven’t spoken about yet, is one very near and dear to my heart, the whole issue of climate change, the Paris agreement, how you’ll approach it. You own some of the most beautiful links golf courses in the world …
[laughter, cross talk]
TRUMP: [laughing] I read your article. Some will be even better because actually like Doral is a little bit off … so it’ll be perfect. [inaudible] He doesn’t say that. He just says that the ones that are near the water will be gone, but Doral will be in great shape.
[laughter]
FRIEDMAN: But it’s really important to me, and I think to a lot of our readers, to know where you’re going to go with this. I don’t think anyone objects to, you know, doing all forms of energy. But are you going to take America out of the world’s lead of confronting climate change?
TRUMP: I’m looking at it very closely, Tom. I’ll tell you what. I have an open mind to it. We’re going to look very carefully. It’s one issue that’s interesting because there are few things where there’s more division than climate change. You don’t tend to hear this, but there are people on the other side of that issue who are, think, don’t even …
SULZBERGER: We do hear it.
FRIEDMAN: I was on ‘Squawk Box’ with Joe Kernen this morning, so I got an earful of it.
[laughter]
TRUMP: Joe is one of them. But a lot of smart people disagree with you. I have a very open mind. And I’m going to study a lot of the things that happened on it and we’re going to look at it very carefully. But I have an open mind.
SULZBERGER: Well, since we’re living on an island, sir, I want to thank you for having an open mind. We saw what these storms are now doing, right? We’ve seen it personally. Straight up.
FRIEDMAN: But you have an open mind on this?
TRUMP: I do have an open mind. And we’ve had storms always, Arthur.
SULZBERGER: Not like this.
TRUMP: You know the hottest day ever was in 1890-something, 98. You know, you can make lots of cases for different views. I have a totally open mind.
My uncle was for 35 years a professor at M.I.T. He was a great engineer, scientist. He was a great guy. And he was … a long time ago, he had feelings — this was a long time ago — he had feelings on this subject. It’s a very complex subject. I’m not sure anybody is ever going to really know. I know we have, they say they have science on one side but then they also have those horrible emails that were sent between the scientists. Where was that, in Geneva or wherever five years ago? Terrible. Where they got caught, you know, so you see that and you say, what’s this all about. I absolutely have an open mind. I will tell you this: Clean air is vitally important. Clean water, crystal clean water is vitally important. Safety is vitally important.
And you know, you mentioned a lot of the courses. I have some great, great, very successful golf courses. I’ve received so many environmental awards for the way I’ve done, you know. I’ve done a tremendous amount of work where I’ve received tremendous numbers. Sometimes I’ll say I’m actually an environmentalist and people will smile in some cases and other people that know me understand that’s true. Open mind.
JAMES BENNET, editorial page editor: When you say an open mind, you mean you’re just not sure whether human activity causes climate change? Do you think human activity is or isn’t connected?
TRUMP: I think right now … well, I think there is some connectivity. There is some, something. It depends on how much. It also depends on how much it’s going to cost our companies. You have to understand, our companies are noncompetitive right now.
They’re really largely noncompetitive. About four weeks ago, I started adding a certain little sentence into a lot of my speeches, that we’ve lost 70,000 factories since W. Bush. 70,000. When I first looked at the number, I said: ‘That must be a typo. It can’t be 70, you can’t have 70,000, you wouldn’t think you have 70,000 factories here.’ And it wasn’t a typo, it’s right. We’ve lost 70,000 factories.
We’re not a competitive nation with other nations anymore. We have to make ourselves competitive. We’re not competitive for a lot of reasons.
That’s becoming more and more of the reason. Because a lot of these countries that we do business with, they make deals with our president, or whoever, and then they don’t adhere to the deals, you know that. And it’s much less expensive for their companies to produce products. So I’m going to be studying that very hard, and I think I have a very big voice in it. And I think my voice is listened to, especially by people that don’t believe in it. And we’ll let you know.
FRIEDMAN: I’d hate to see Royal Aberdeen underwater.
TRUMP: The North Sea, that could be, that’s a good one, right?
ELISABETH BUMILLER, Washington bureau chief: I just wanted to follow up on the question you were asked about not pursuing any investigations into Hillary Clinton. Did you mean both the email investigation and the foundation investigation — you will not pursue either one of those?
TRUMP: Yeah, look, you know we’ll have people that do things but my inclination would be, for whatever power I have on the matter, is to say let’s go forward. This has been looked at for so long. Ad nauseam. Let’s go forward. And you know, you could also make the case that some good work was done in the foundation and they could have made mistakes, etc. etc. I think it’s time, I think it’s time for people to say let’s go and solve some of the problems that we have, which are massive problems and, you know, I do think that they’ve gone through a lot. I think losing is going through a lot. It was a tough, it was a very tough evening for her. I think losing is going through a lot. So, for whatever it’s worth, my, my attitude is strongly we have to go forward, we have so many different problems to solve, I don’t think we have to delve back in the past. I also think that would be a very divisive, well I think it would be very divisive, you know I’m talking about bringing together, and then they go into all sorts of stuff, I think it would be very, very divisive for the country.
SULZBERGER: I agree, I think speaking not as a journalist now, it’s very healthy. There, and then we’re going to go
MICHAEL D. SHEAR, White House correspondent: Mr. Trump, Mike Shear. I cover the White House, covering your administration …
TRUMP: See ya there.
[laughter]
SHEAR: Just one quick clarification on the climate change, do you intend to, as you said, pull out of the Paris Climate …
TRUMP: I’m going to take a look at it.
SHEAR [interrupts]: And if the reaction from foreign leaders is to slap tariffs on American goods to offset the carbon that the United States had pledged to reduce, is that O.K. with you? And then the second question is on your sort of mixing of your global business interests and the presidency. There’s already, even just in the 10, two weeks you’ve been president-elect, instances where you’ve met with your Indian business partners …
TRUMP: Sure.
SHEAR: You’ve talked about the impact of the wind farms on your golf course. People, experts who are lawyers and ethics experts, say that all of that is totally inappropriate, so I guess the question for you is, what do you see as the appropriate structure for keeping those two things separate, and are there any lines that you think you won’t want to cross once you’re in the White House?
TRUMP: O.K. First of all, on countries. I think that countries will not do that to us. I don’t think if they’re run by a person that understands leadership and negotiation they’re in no position to do that to us, no matter what I do. They’re in no position to do that to us, and that won’t happen, but I’m going to take a look at it. A very serious look. I want to also see how much this is costing, you know, what’s the cost to it, and I’ll be talking to you folks in the not-too-distant future about it, having to do with what just took place.
As far as the, you know, potential conflict of interests, though, I mean I know that from the standpoint, the law is totally on my side, meaning, the president can’t have a conflict of interest. That’s been reported very widely. Despite that, I don’t want there to be a conflict of interest anyway. And the laws, the president can’t. And I understand why the president can’t have a conflict of interest now because everything a president does in some ways is like a conflict of interest, but I have, I’ve built a very great company and it’s a big company and it’s all over the world. People are starting to see, when they look at all these different jobs, like in India and other things, number one, a job like that builds great relationships with the people of India, so it’s all good. But I have to say, the partners come in, they’re very, very successful people. They come in, they’d say, they said, ‘Would it be possible to have a picture?’ Actually, my children are working on that job. So I can say to them, Arthur, ‘I don’t want to have a picture,’ or, I can take a picture. I mean, I think it’s wonderful to take a picture. I’m fine with a picture. But if it were up to some people, I would never, ever see my daughter Ivanka again. That would be like you never seeing your son again. That wouldn’t be good. That wouldn’t be good. But I’d never, ever see my daughter Ivanka.
UNKNOWN: That means you’d have to make Ivanka deputy President, you know.
TRUMP: I know, I know, yeah. [room laughs] Well, I couldn’t do that either. I can’t, that can’t work. I can’t do anything, I would never see my, I guess the only son I’d be allowed to see, at least for a little while, would be Barron, because he’s 10. But, but, so there has to be [unintelligible]. It’s a very interesting case.
UNKNOWN: You could sell your company though, right? With all due respect, you could sell your company and then …
TRUMP: Well …
UNKNOWN: And then you could see them all the time.
TRUMP: That’s a very hard thing to do, you know what, because I have real estate. I have real estate all over the world, which now people are understanding. When I filed my forms with the federal election, people said, ‘Wow that’s really a big company, that’s a big company.’ It really is big, it’s diverse, it’s all over the world. It’s a great company with great assets. I think that, you know, selling real estate isn’t like selling stock. Selling real estate is much different, it’s in a much different world. I’d say this, and I mean this and I said it on “60 Minutes” the other night: My company is so unimportant to me relative to what I’m doing, ’cause I don’t need money, I don’t need anything, and by the way, I’m very under-leveraged, I have a very small percentage of my money in debt, very very small percentage of my money in debt, in fact, banks have said ‘We’d like to loan you money, we’d like to give you any amount of money.’ I’ve been there before, I’ve had it both ways, I’ve been over-levered, I’ve been under-levered and, especially as you get older, under-levered is much better.
UNKNOWN: Mr. President-elect …
TRUMP: Just a minute, because it’s an important question. I don’t care about my company. I mean, if a partner comes in from India or if a partner comes in from Canada, where we did a beautiful big building that just opened, and they want to take a picture and come into my office, and my kids come in and, I originally made the deal with these people, I mean what am I going to say? I’m not going to talk to you, I’m not going to take pictures? You have to, you know, on a human basis, you take pictures. But I just want to say that I am given the right to do something so important in terms of so many of the issues we discussed, in terms of health care, in terms of so many different things. I don’t care about my company. It doesn’t matter. My kids run it. They’ll say I have a conflict because we just opened a beautiful hotel on Pennsylvania Avenue, so every time somebody stays at that hotel, if they stay because I’m president, I guess you could say it’s a conflict of interest. It’s a conflict of interest, but again, I’m not going to have anything to do with the hotel, and they may very well. I mean it could be that occupancy at that hotel will be because, psychologically, occupancy at that hotel will be probably a more valuable asset now than it was before, O.K.? The brand is certainly a hotter brand than it was before. I can’t help that, but I don’t care. I said on “60 Minutes”: I don’t care. Because it doesn’t matter. The only thing that matters to me is running our country.
MICHAEL BARBARO, political reporter: Mr. President-elect, can I press you a little further on what structures you would put in place to keep the presidency and the company separate and to avoid things that, for example, were reported in The Times in the past 24 hours about meeting with leaders of Brexit about wind farms …
TRUMP: About meeting with who?
BARBARO: Leaders of Brexit about wind farms that might interfere with the views of your golf course and how to keep, what structures, can you talk about that meeting, by the way?
TRUMP: Was I involved with the wind farms recently? Or, not that I know of. I mean, I have a problem with wind …
BARBARO: But you brought it up in the meeting, didn’t you?
TRUMP: Which meeting? I don’t know. I might have.
BARBARO: With leaders of Brexit.
MANY VOICES: With Farage.
TRUMP: Oh, I see. I might have brought it up. But not having to do with me, just I mean, the wind is a very deceiving thing. First of all, we don’t make the windmills in the United States. They’re made in Germany and Japan. They’re made out of massive amounts of steel, which goes into the atmosphere, whether it’s in our country or not, it goes into the atmosphere. The windmills kill birds and the windmills need massive subsidies. In other words, we’re subsidizing wind mills all over this country. I mean, for the most part they don’t work. I don’t think they work at all without subsidy, and that bothers me, and they kill all the birds. You go to a windmill, you know in California they have the, what is it? The golden eagle? And they’re like, if you shoot a golden eagle, they go to jail for five years and yet they kill them by, they actually have to get permits that they’re only allowed to kill 30 or something in one year. The windmills are devastating to the bird population, O.K. With that being said, there’s a place for them. But they do need subsidy. So, if I talk negatively. I’ve been saying the same thing for years about you know, the wind industry. I wouldn’t want to subsidize it. Some environmentalists agree with me very much because of all of the things I just said, including the birds, and some don’t. But it’s hard to explain. I don’t care about anything having to do with anything having to do with anything other than the country.
BARBARO: But the structures, just to be clear, that’s the question. How do you formalize the separation of these things so that there is not a question of whether or not you as president …
TRUMP: O.K.
BARBARO: … are trying to influence something, like wind farms?
TRUMP: O.K., I don’t want to influence anything, because it’s not that, it’s not that important to me. It’s hard to explain.
BARBARO: Yes, but the structures?
TRUMP: Now, according to the law, see I figured there’s something where you put something in this massive trust and there’s also — nothing is written. In other words, in theory, I can be president of the United States and run my business 100 percent, sign checks on my business, which I am phasing out of very rapidly, you know, I sign checks, I’m the old-fashioned type. I like to sign checks so I know what is going on as opposed to pressing a computer button, boom, and thousands of checks are automatically sent. It keeps, it tells me what’s going on a little bit and it tells contractors that I’m watching. But I am phasing that out now, and handing that to Eric Trump and Don Trump and Ivanka Trump for the most part, and some of my executives, so that’s happening right now.
But in theory I could run my business perfectly, and then run the country perfectly. And there’s never been a case like this where somebody’s had, like, if you look at other people of wealth, they didn’t have this kind of asset and this kind of wealth, frankly. It’s just a different thing.
But there is no — I assumed that you’d have to set up some type of trust or whatever and you know. And I was actually a little bit surprised to see it. So in theory I don’t have to do anything. But I would like to do something. I would like to try and formalize something, because I don’t care about my business.
Doral is going to run very nice. We own this incredible place in Miami. We own many incredible places, including Turnberry, I guess you heard. There’s one guy that does — when I say Turnberry, you know what that is, right. Do a little [inaudible]. But they’re going to run well, we have good managers, they’re going to run really well.
Photo
Mr. Trump with New York Times editors and reporters.CreditHiroko Masuike/The New York Times
So I don’t have to do anything, but I want to do something if I can. If there is something.
BARBARO: Can you promise us when you decide exactly what that is, you’ll come tell The New York Times about it?
[laughter]
TRUMP: I will. I’ve started it already.
SULZBERGER: One of our great salesmen, by the way.
TRUMP: I can see that. I’ve started it already by, I mean, I’ve greatly reduced the check-signing and the business. I’ve greatly reduced meetings with contractors, meetings with different people that, you know, I’ve also started by — ’cause I’ve said over the last two years, once I decided I wanted to run, I don’t want to build anything. ’Cause building, like for instance, we built the post office, you’ll be happy to hear, ahead of schedule and under budget. Substantially ahead of schedule. Almost two years ago of schedule. But ahead of schedule, under budget, and it’s a terrific place. That’s the hotel on Pennsylvania.
FRIEDMAN: Just so you know, General Electric has a big wind turbine factory in South Carolina. Just so you know.
TRUMP: Well that’s good. But most of ‘em are made in Germany, most of ‘em are made, you know, Siemens and the Chinese are making most of them.
[cross talk]
TRUMP: They may assemble — if you check, I think you’ll find that the, it’s delivered there and they do most of the assembly.
JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, White House correspondent: Mr. President-elect — I’m sorry I entered late, but I did want to ask you about …
BAQUET: You should introduce yourself.
DAVIS: I’m Julie Davis, one of the White House correspondents.
TRUMP: Hi, Julie.
DAVIS: I apologize for my delayed flight. I wanted to ask you about personnel. They say personnel is policy.
TRUMP: I can’t quite hear.
DAVIS: Personnel.
TRUMP: Personnel.
DAVIS: You hired Steve Bannon to be the chief strategist for you in the White House. He is a hero of the alt-right. He’s been described by some as racist and anti-Semitic. I wonder what message you think you have sent by elevating him to that position and what you would say to those who feel like that indicates something about the kind of country you prefer and the government you’ll run.
TRUMP: Um, I’ve known Steve Bannon a long time. If I thought he was a racist, or alt-right, or any of the things that we can, you know, the terms we can use, I wouldn’t even think about hiring him. First of all, I’m the one that makes the decision, not Steve Bannon or anybody else. And Kellyanne will tell you that.
[laughter]
KELLYANE CONWAY: 100 percent.
TRUMP: And if he said something to me that, in terms of his views, or that I thought were inappropriate or bad, number one I wouldn’t do anything, and number two, he would have to be gone. But I know many people that know him, and in fact, he’s actually getting some very good press from a lot of the people that know him, and people that are on the left. But Steve went to Harvard, he was a, you know, he was very successful, he was a Naval officer, he’s, I think he’s very, very, you know, sadly, really, I think it’s very hard on him. I think he’s having a hard time with it. Because it’s not him. It’s not him.
I’ve known him for a long time. He’s a very, very smart guy. I think he was with Goldman Sachs on top of everything else.
UNKNOWN: What do you make of the website he ran, Breitbart?
TRUMP: The which?
UNKNOWN: Breitbart.
TRUMP: Well, Breitbart’s different. Breitbart cover things, I mean like The New York Times covers things. I mean, I could say that Arthur is alt-right because they covered an alt-right story.
SULZBERGER: [laughing] I am, I am. I’ll take whatever you say. I am always right, but I’m not alt-right.
[laughter, cross talk]
TRUMP: The New York Times covers a lot of stories that are, you know, rough stories. And you know, they have covered some of these things, but The New York Times covers a lot of these things also. It’s just a newspaper, essentially. It’s a newspaper. I know the guy, he’s a decent guy, he’s a very smart guy. He’s done a good job. He hasn’t been with me that long. You know he really came in after the primaries. I had already won the primaries. And if I thought that his views were in that category, I would immediately let him go. And I’ll tell you why. In many respects I think his views are actually on the other side of what a lot of people might think.
DAVIS: But you are aware, sir, with all due respect, that African-Americans and Jews and many folks who disagree with the coverage of Breitbart and the slant that Breitbart brings to the news view him that way, aren’t you?
TRUMP: Yeah, well Breitbart, first of all, is just a publication. And, you know, they cover stories like you cover stories. Now, they are certainly a much more conservative paper, to put it mildly, than The New York Times. But Breitbart really is a news organization that’s become quite successful, and it’s got readers and it does cover subjects that are on the right, but it covers subjects on the left also. I mean it’s a pretty big, it’s a pretty big thing. And he helped build it into a pretty successful news organization.
Now, I’ll tell you what, I know him very well. I will say this, and I will say this, if I thought that strongly, if I thought that he was doing anything, or had any ideas that were different than the ideas that you would think, I would ask him very politely to leave. But in the meantime, I think he’s been treated very unfairly.
It’s very interesting ’cause a lot of people are coming to his defense right now.
PRIEBUS: We have never experienced a single episode of any of those accusations. It’s been the total opposite. It’s been a great team, and it’s just not there. And what the president-elect is saying is 100 percent true.
[cross talk]
TRUMP: And by the way, if you see something or get something where you feel that I’m wrong, and you have some info — I would love to hear it. You can call me, Arthur can call me, I would love to hear. The only one who can’t call me is Maureen [Dowd, opinion columnist]. She treats me too rough.
I don’t know what happened to Maureen! She was so good, Gail [Collins, opinion columnist]. For years she was so good.
[cross talk]
SULZBERGER: As we all say about Maureen, it’s not your fault, it’s just your turn.
[laughter]
ROSS DOUTHAT, opinion columnist: I have a slightly different, but somewhat Steve Bannon-related question, I guess. It’s about the future of the Republican Party. You started out here talking about winning in so many states where no Republican has won in decades, especially Midwestern Rust Belt states. And I think many people think that one of the reasons you won was that you deliberately campaigned as a different kind of Republican. You had different things to say on trade, entitlements, foreign policy, even your daughter Ivanka’s child care plan was sort of distinctive. And now you’re in a situation where you’re governing and staffing up an administration with a Republican Party whose leaders, and Reince, may differ with me a little on this, but don’t always see eye-to-eye on those views.
TRUMP: Although right now they’re loving me.
[laughter]
UNKNOWN: Well, right now they are.
[cross talk]
TRUMP: Paul Ryan right now loves me, Mitch McConnell loves me, it’s amazing how winning can change things. I’ve liked Chuck Schumer for a long time. I’ve actually, I’ve raised a lot of money for Chuck and given him a lot of money over the years. I think I was the first person that ever contributed to Chuck Schumer. I had a Brooklyn office, a little office, in a little apartment building in Brooklyn in Sheepshead Bay where I worked with my father.
And Chuck Schumer came in and I gave him, I believe, I don’t know if he’s willing to admit this, but I believe it was his first campaign contribution, $500. But Chuck Schumer’s a good guy. I think we’ll get along very well.
DOUTHAT: I guess that’s my question is, how much do you expect to be able to both run an administration and negotiate with a Republican-led Congress as a different kind of Republican. And do you worry that you’ll wake up three years from now and go back to campaigning in the Rust Belt and people will say, well, he governed more like Paul Ryan than like Donald Trump.
TRUMP: No, I don’t worry about that. ’Cause I didn’t need to do this. I was telling Arthur before: ‘Arthur I didn’t need to do this. I’m doing this to do a good job.’ That’s what I want to do, and I think that what happened in the Rust Belt, they call it the Rust Belt for a reason. If you go through it, you look back 20 years, they didn’t used to call it the Rust Belt. You pass factory after factory after factory that’s empty and rusting. Rust is the good part, ’cause they’re worse than rusting, they’re falling down. No, I wouldn’t sacrifice that. To me more important is taking care of the people that really have proven to be, to love Donald Trump, as opposed to the political people. And frankly if the political people don’t take care of these people, they’re not going to win and you’re going to end up with maybe a total different kind of government than what you’re looking at right now. These people are really angry. They’re smart, they’re workers, and they’re angry. I call them the forgotten men and women. And I use that in speeches, I say they’re the forgotten people — they were totally forgotten. And we’re going to bring jobs back. We’re going to bring jobs back, big league. I’ve spoken to so many companies already, I say, don’t plan on moving your company, ’cause you’re not going to be able to move your company and sell us your product. You think you’re going to just sell it across what will be a strong border, you know at least we’re going to have a border. But just don’t plan on it.
And I’ll tell you, I believe, and you’ll hear announcements over the next couple of months, but I believe I’ve talked numerous comp — in four-minute conversations with top people — numerous companies that have, leaving, or potentially leaving our country with thousands of jobs.
FRIEDMAN: Are you worried, though, that those companies will keep their factories here, but the jobs will be replaced by robots?
TRUMP: They will, and we’ll make the robots too.
[laughter]
TRUMP: It’s a big thing, we’ll make the robots too. Right now we don’t make the robots. We don’t make anything. But we’re going to, I mean, look, robotics is becoming very big and we’re going to do that. We’re going to have more factories. We can’t lose 70,000 factories. Just can’t do it. We’re going to start making things.
I was honored yesterday, I got a call from Bill Gates, great call, we had a great conversation, I got a call from Tim Cook at Apple, and I said, ‘Tim, you know one of the things that will be a real achievement for me is when I get Apple to build a big plant in the United States, or many big plants in the United States, where instead of going to China, and going to Vietnam, and going to the places that you go to, you’re making your product right here.’ He said, ‘I understand that.’ I said: ‘I think we’ll create the incentives for you, and I think you’re going to do it. We’re going for a very large tax cut for corporations, which you’ll be happy about.’ But we’re going for big tax cuts, we have to get rid of regulations, regulations are making it impossible. Whether you’re liberal or conservative, I mean I could sit down and show you regulations that anybody would agree are ridiculous. It’s gotten to be a free-for-all. And companies can’t, they can’t even start up, they can’t expand, they’re choking.
I tell you, one thing I would say, so, I’m giving a big tax cut and I’m giving big regulation cuts, and I’ve seen all of the small business owners over the United States, and all of the big business owners, I’ve met so many people. They are more excited about the regulation cut than about the tax cut. And I would’ve never said that’s possible, because the tax cut’s going to be substantial. You know we have companies leaving our country because the taxes are too high. But they’re leaving also because of the regulations. And I would say, of the two, and I would not have thought this, regulation cuts, substantial regulation cuts, are more important than, and more enthusiastically supported, than even the big tax cuts.
UNKNOWN: Mr. President-elect, I wanted to ask you, there was a conference this past weekend in Washington of people who pledged their allegiance to Nazism.
TRUMP: Boy, you are really into this stuff, huh?
PRIEBUS: I think we answered that one right off the bat.
UNKNOWN: Are you going to condemn them?
TRUMP: Of course I did, of course I did.
PRIEBUS: He already did.
UNKNOWN: Are you going to do it right now?
TRUMP: Oh, I see, maybe you weren’t here. Sure. Would you like me to do it here? I’ll do it here. Of course I condemn. I disavow and condemn.
SULZBERGER: We’ll go with that. I’d like to move to infrastructure, apologies, and then we’ll go back. Because a lot of the investment you are talking about, a lot of the jobs you are talking about — is infrastructure going to be the core of your first few years?
TRUMP: No, it’s not the core, but it’s an important factor. We’re going for a lot of things, between taxes, between regulations, between health care replacement, we’re going to talk repeal and replace. ’Cause health care is — you know people are paying a 100 percent increase and they’re not even getting anything, the deductibles are so high, you have deductibles $16,000. So they’re paying all of this money and they don’t even get health care. So it’s very important. So there are a lot of things. But infrastructure, Arthur, is going to be a part of it.
SULZBERGER: It’s part of jobs, isn’t it?
TRUMP: I don’t even think it’s a big part of it. It’s going to be a big number but I think I am doing things that are more important than infrastructure, but infrastructure is still a part of it, and we’re talking about a very large-scale infrastructure bill. And that’s not a very Republican thing — I didn’t even know that, frankly.
SULZBERGER: It worked for Franklin Roosevelt.
TRUMP: It didn’t work for Obama because unfortunately they didn’t spend the money last time on infrastructure. They spent it on a lot of other things. You know, nobody can find out where that last — you know, from a few years ago — where that money went. And we’re going to make sure it is spent on infrastructure and roads and highways. I have a friend, he’s a big trucker, one of the biggest. And he orders these incredible trucks, the best, I won’t mention the name but it’s a certain truck company that makes — they call them the Rolls-Royce of trucks. You know, the most expensive trucks. And he calls me up about two months ago and he goes, ‘Man, I’m going to buy the cheapest trucks I can buy.’ And I said, ‘Why?’ and — you know, and this is the biggest guy — he goes, ‘My trucks are coming back, they’re going from New York to California and they’re all busted up. The highways are in such bad shape, they’re hitting potholes, they’re hitting everything.’ He said, ‘I’m not buying these trucks anymore, I’m going to buy the cheapest stuff and the strongest tires I can get.’ That’s the exact expression he used, ‘the cheapest trucks and the strongest tires.’
We’re hitting so many bad points, we, you know, I said, ‘So tell me, you’ve been doing this how long?’ 45 years. He built it over 45 years. I said, ‘Have you ever seen it like this?’ He said, ‘The roads have never been like this.’ It’s an interesting …
BAQUET: What did, what did, I’m curious what Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan said when you said, ‘I’m going to launch a multibillion-dollar infrastructure program.’ Are they reluctant to spend that?
TRUMP: Honestly right now …
DOUTHAT: Trillion. Trillion, I think, was the figure.
BAQUET: Because they would be in the wing of the Republican Party that would say, ‘That’s great, but you’re not going to be able to do that and balance the budget.’
TRUMP: Let’s see if I get it done. Right now they’re in love with me. O.K.? Four weeks ago they weren’t in love with me. Don’t forget — if I read The New York Times, and you don’t have to put this on the record — it can be if you want, you might not want …
SULZBERGER: You say if, but you do …
TRUMP: Well, I do read it. Unfortunately. I would have lived about 20 years longer if I didn’t.
SULZBERGER: There’s Nixon’s quote right there if you’d love to reread it —
TRUMP: I know. But when you look at the different, all the newspapers, I was going to lose the presidency, I was going to take the House with me, and the Senate had no chance. It was going to be the biggest humiliation in the history of politics in this country. And instead I won the presidency, easily, and I mean easily — you look at those states, I had states where I won by 30 and 40 points. I won the presidency easily, I helped numerous senators — in fact the only senators that didn’t get elected were two — one up in New Hampshire who refused to say that she was going to vote for me, who by the way would love a job in the administration and I said, ‘No, thank you.’ That’s on the record. This is where I’m different than a politician — I know what to say, I just believe it’s sort of interesting.
She’d love to have a job in the administration, I said, ‘No, thank you.’ She refused to vote for me. And a senator in Nevada who frankly said, he endorsed me then he unendorsed me, and he went down like a lead balloon. And then they called me before the race and said they wanted me to endorse him and do a big thing and I said, ‘No thank you, good luck.’ You know, let’s see what happens. I said, off the record, I hope you lose. Off the record. He was! He was up by 10 points — you know who I’m talking about.
So, others — if you look at Missouri, [Senator Roy] Blunt, he was down five points a few days before the election, he called for help, I gave him help, and I think I was up like over 30 points in Missouri. I was leading by a massive amount, 28 points. I gave him help and he ended up winning by four points or something. I brought a number of them. Pennsylvania, brought over the finish line. Let’s see, we brought Johnson, in, you know, that was a good one. We brought him over the line in Wisconsin. Winning Wisconsin was big stuff, that’s something that …
FRIEDMAN: Mr. President-elect, I came …
TRUMP: So right now I’m in very good shape, but
FRIEDMAN: I came here thinking you’d be awed and overwhelmed by this job, but I feel like you are getting very comfortable with it.
TRUMP: I feel comfortable. I feel comfortable. I am awed by the job, as anybody would be, but I honestly, Tom, I feel so comfortable and you know it would be, to me, a great achievement if I could come back here in a year or two years and say — and have a lot of the folks here say, ‘You’ve done a great job.’ And I don’t mean just a conservative job, ’cause I’m not talking conservative. I mean just, we’ve done a good job.
SHEAR: To follow up on Matt, after you met with President Obama, he described you to folks as — that you seemed overwhelmed by what he told you. So I wonder if you are overwhelmed by the magnitude of the job that you’re about to inherit and if you can tell us anything more about that conversation with the president and the apparently subsequent conversations that you’ve had on the phone since then. And then maybe talk a little bit about foreign policy, that’s something we haven’t touched on here, and whether or not you believe in the kind of world order — a world order led by America in terms of having this country underwrite the security and the free markets of the world, which have been in place for decades.
TRUMP: Sure. I had a great meeting with President Obama. I never met him before. I really liked him a lot. The meeting was supposed to be 10 minutes, 15 minutes max, because there were a lot of people waiting outside, for both of us. And it ended up being — you were there — I guess an hour-and-a-half meeting, close. And it was a great chemistry. I think if he said overwhelmed, I don’t think he meant that in a bad way. I think he meant that it is a very overwhelming job. But I’m not overwhelmed by it. You can do things and fix it, I think he meant it that way. He said very nice things after the meeting and I said very nice things about him. I really enjoyed my meeting with him. We have — you know, we come from different sides of the equation, but it’s nevertheless something that — I didn’t know if I’d like him. I probably thought that maybe I wouldn’t, but I did, I did like him. I really enjoyed him a lot. I’ve spoken to him since the meeting.
Photo
The motorcade of Mr. Trump after the meeting.CreditShannon Stapleton/Reuters
SHEAR: What did you say to him?
TRUMP: Just a basic conversation.
I think he’s looking to do absolutely the right thing for the country in terms of transition and I really, I’m telling you, we had a meeting, Arthur, that went for an hour and a half that could have gone for three or four hours. It was a great — it was just a very good meeting.
UNKNOWN: Sort of like this meeting.
[cross talk, laughter]
TRUMP: He told me what he thought his, what the biggest problems of the country were, which I don’t think I should reveal, I don’t mind if he reveals them. But I was actually surprised a little bit. But he told me the problems, he told me things that he considered assets, but he did tell me what he thought were the biggest problems, in particular one problem that he thought was a big problem for the country, which I’d rather have you ask him. But I really found the meeting to be very good. And I hope we can have a good — I mean, it doesn’t mean we’re going to agree on everything, but I hope that we will have a great long-term relationship. I really liked him a lot and I’m a little bit surprised I’m telling you that I really liked him a lot.
Let’s go foreign policy, sure. Sure.
FRIEDMAN: What do you see as America’s role in the world? Do you believe that the role …
TRUMP: That’s such a big question.
FRIEDMAN: The role that we played for 50 years as kind of the global balancer, paying more for things because they were in our ultimate interest, one hears from you, I sense, is really shrinking that role.
TRUMP: I don’t think we should be a nation builder. I think we’ve tried that. I happen to think that going into Iraq was perhaps … I mean you could say maybe we could have settled the civil war, O.K.? I think going into Iraq was one of the great mistakes in the history of our country. I think getting out of it — I think we got out of it wrong, then lots of bad things happened, including the formation of ISIS. We could have gotten out of it differently.
FRIEDMAN: NATO, Russia?
TRUMP: I think going in was a terrible, terrible mistake. Syria, we have to solve that problem because we are going to just keep fighting, fighting forever. I have a different view on Syria than everybody else. Well, not everybody else, but then a lot of people. I had to listen to [Senator] Lindsey Graham, who, give me a break. I had to listen to Lindsey Graham talk about, you know, attacking Syria and attacking, you know, and it’s like you’re now attacking Russia, you’re attacking Iran, you’re attacking. And what are we getting? We’re getting — and what are we getting? And I have some very definitive, I have some very strong ideas on Syria. I think what’s happened is a horrible, horrible thing. To look at the deaths, and I’m not just talking deaths on our side, which are horrible, but the deaths — I mean you look at these cities, Arthur, where they’re totally, they’re rubble, massive areas, and they say two people were injured. No, thousands of people have died. O.K. And I think it’s a shame. And ideally we can get — do something with Syria. I spoke to Putin, as you know, he called me, essentially …
UNKNOWN: How do you see that relationship?
TRUMP: Essentially everybody called me, all of the major leaders, and most of them I’ve spoken to.
FRIEDMAN: Will you have a reset with Russia?
TRUMP: I wouldn’t use that term after what happened, you know, previously. I think — I would love to be able to get along with Russia and I think they’d like to be able to get along with us. It’s in our mutual interest. And I don’t go in with any preconceived notion, but I will tell you, I would say — when they used to say, during the campaign, Donald Trump loves Putin, Putin loves Donald Trump, I said, huh, wouldn’t it be nice, I’d say this in front of thousands of people, wouldn’t it be nice to actually report what they said, wouldn’t it be nice if we actually got along with Russia, wouldn’t it be nice if we went after ISIS together, which is, by the way, aside from being dangerous, it’s very expensive, and ISIS shouldn’t have been even allowed to form, and the people will stand up and give me a massive hand. You know they thought it was bad that I was getting along with Putin or that I believe strongly if we can get along with Russia that’s a positive thing. It is a great thing that we can get along with not only Russia but that we get along with other countries.
JOSEPH KAHN, managing editor: On Syria, would you mind, you said you have a very strong idea about what to do with the Syria conflict, can you describe that for us?
TRUMP: I can only say this: We have to end that craziness that’s going on in Syria. One of the things that was told to me — can I say this off the record, or is everything on the record?
SULZBERGER: No, if you want to …
TRUMP: I don’t want to violate, I don’t want to violate a …
SULZBERGER: If you want to go off the record, we have agreed you can go off the record. Ladies and gentlemen, we are off the record for this moment.
[Trump speaks off the record.]
TRUMP: Now we can go back on.
SULZBERGER: I’m going to play the cop here. We’ve got only two and a half minutes left, because they have a hard stop at 2. And by the way, I want to thank you again, on behalf of all of us …
TRUMP: Thank you.
SULZBERGER: … for this meeting, and really I mean that. We are back on the record. Maggie, you get the last question.
TRUMP: Is he a tough boss, folks? Is he tough?
HABERMAN: I have two questions, very, very quickly. One is your vice president-elect left open the idea of returning to waterboarding. You talked about that on the campaign trail. I’m hoping you can talk about how you view torture at this point, and also what are you hoping that Jared Kushner will do in your administration and will you bring him in formally?
TRUMP: O.K., O.K. So, I didn’t hear the second question.
HABERMAN: Jared Kushner. What will Jared Kushner’s role be in your administration?
TRUMP: Oh. Maybe nothing. Because I don’t want to have people saying ‘conflict.’ Even though the president of the United States — I hope whoever is writing this story, it’s written fairly — the president of the United States is allowed to have whatever conflicts he wants — he or she wants. But I don’t want to go by that. Jared’s a very smart guy. He’s a very good guy. The people that know him, he’s a quality person and I think he can be very helpful. I would love to be able to be the one that made peace with Israel and the Palestinians. I would love that, that would be such a great achievement. Because nobody’s been able to do it.
HABERMAN: Do you think he can be part of that?
TRUMP: Well, I think he’d be very good at it. I mean he knows it so well. He knows the region, knows the people, knows the players. I would love to be — and you can put that down in a list of many things that I’d like to be able to do. Now a lot of people tell me, really great people tell me, that it’s impossible, you can’t do it. I’ve had a lot of, actually, great Israeli businesspeople tell me, you can’t do that, it’s impossible. I disagree, I think you can make peace. I think people are tired now of being shot, killed. At some point, when do they come? I think we can do that. I have reason to believe I can do that.
HABERMAN: And on torture? Where are you — and waterboarding?
TRUMP: So, I met with General Mattis, who is a very respected guy. In fact, I met with a number of other generals, they say he’s the finest there is. He is being seriously, seriously considered for secretary of defense, which is — I think it’s time maybe, it’s time for a general. Look at what’s going on. We don’t win, we can’t beat anybody, we don’t win anymore. At anything. We don’t win on the border, we don’t win with trade, we certainly don’t win with the military. General Mattis is a strong, highly dignified man. I met with him at length and I asked him that question. I said, what do you think of waterboarding? He said — I was surprised — he said, ‘I’ve never found it to be useful.’ He said, ‘I’ve always found, give me a pack of cigarettes and a couple of beers and I do better with that than I do with torture.’ And I was very impressed by that answer. I was surprised, because he’s known as being like the toughest guy. And when he said that, I’m not saying it changed my mind. [An earlier version made a mistake in transcription. Mr. Trump said “changed my mind,” not “changed my man.”] Look, we have people that are chopping off heads and drowning people in steel cages and we’re not allowed to waterboard. But I’ll tell you what, I was impressed by that answer. It certainly does not — it’s not going to make the kind of a difference that maybe a lot of people think. If it’s so important to the American people, I would go for it. I would be guided by that. But General Mattis found it to be very less important, much less important than I thought he would say. I thought he would say — you know he’s known as Mad Dog Mattis, right? Mad Dog for a reason. I thought he’d say ‘It’s phenomenal, don’t lose it.’ He actually said, ‘No, give me some cigarettes and some drinks, and we’ll do better.’
SULZBERGER: So, I, with apologies, I’m going to go to our C.E.O., Mark Thompson, for the last, last question.
TRUMP: Very powerful man …
MARK THOMPSON: Thank you, and it’s a really short one, but after all the talk about libel and libel laws, are you committed to the First Amendment to the Constitution?
TRUMP: Oh, I was hoping he wasn’t going to say that. I think you’ll be happy. I think you’ll be happy. Actually, somebody said to me on that, they said, ‘You know, it’s a great idea, softening up those laws, but you may get sued a lot more.’ I said, ‘You know, you’re right, I never thought about that.’ I said, ‘You know, I have to start thinking about that.’ So, I, I think you’ll be O.K. I think you’re going to be fine.
SULZBERGER: Well, thank you very much for this. Really appreciate this.
TRUMP: Thank you all, very much, it’s a great honor. I will say, The Times is, it’s a great, great American jewel. A world jewel. And I hope we can all get along. We’re looking for the same thing, and I hope we can all get along well.
Story 1: General James Mattis (Ret.) served in the United States Marine Corps from 1969 to 2013 — The Next Secretary of Defense? Very Impressive Choice — Videos —
Trump is Considering General Mad Dog Mattis to Cabinet Post – November 21, 2016
James Mattis A Contender For Secretary Of Defense
GEN JAMES MATTIS • DEFENCE SECRETARY
RETIRED GENERAL JAMES MATTIS EYED AS TRUMP’S POSSIBLE PICK FOR DEFENSE SECRETARY
Fox & Friends (11/21/16) Inside The Transition – What Did T.W. Shannon Discuss With Mr.Trump?
The facts and fiction behind the ‘draft Mattis’ campaign
Published on Apr 28, 2016
Dissatisfied Republicans are pointing to Retired Marine General James Mattis to run third party; ‘Special Report’s’ Bret Baier takes a closer look
General Mattis Full Remarks at CENTCOM Change of Command Ceremony
Ayotte Questions General Mattis on Iran
SENATOR JOHN McCAIN AND GENERAL JAMES MATTIS DISCUSS WIKILEAKS 7-27-10
Charles Hill and General James Mattis on the Iran Deal, Democracy, and Freedom
General Jim (Mad Dog) Mattis on the Nature of War
2014 Salute to Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans – General James Mattis, USMC (Ret.) – Full Version
The Middle East at an Inflection Point with Gen. Mattis
The State of the World
Published on May 14, 2015
With a growing threat of Islamist terrorists, continued unrest in the Middle East, an increasingly assertive North Korea, and challenging relations in the Asia-Pacific, General Mattis will examine the current state of the world, how it has come to be, where it is going, and what role the U.S. has to play. General Mattis served as the 11th Commander of the United States Central Command, having previously served as Commander of the U.S. Joint Forces Command as well as NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Transformation. The Heritage Foundation is honored that General Mattis will deliver the annual Colonel James D. McGinley Lecture as part of Heritage’s 2015 Protect America Month programming.
USNA LC12 – GEN James N. Mattis, USMC
Published on Aug 26, 2013
General James N. Matis, USMC, Commander U.S. Central Command, was the Forrestal Speaker for the 2012 USNA Leadership Conference. In his motivating and inspiring address to both the conference participants and the Brigade of Midshipmen he spoke to the theme of “Navigating through Uncharted Waters.” General Matis focused on education, self-confidence, and the importance of cultivating a positive relationship between yourself and the people you lead.
The theme for the 2012 Leadership Conference was “Visionary Leadership: Navigating Through Uncharted Waters”.
Reflections with General James Mattis – Conversations with History
Published on Jun 5, 2014
(Visit: http://www.uctv.tv/) Conversations host Harry Kreisler welcomes General James Mattis (U.S. Marine Corp. ret.), former Head of Central Command for a discussion of his military career. Topics covered include: his formative years, the skill set and temperament required to be a marine, his command philosophy, his battle experience in Afghanistan and Iraq, the role of the military in securing peace, the contribution of the military to the policy debate, and his advice for students as they prepare for the future. Recorded on 03/20/2014. Series: “Conversations with History” [6/2014] [Public Affairs] [Show ID: 28135]
Mark Stoler on Marshall
Soldier and Statesman (Part 1)
Soldier and Statesman (Part 2)
George C Marshall – Famous Generals – The Big Picture
George C. Marshall – Personal Perspective – Part 1 of 2
George C. Marshall – Personal Perspective – Part 2 of 2
George C. Marshall: Soldier-Statesman of the American Century
Published on Nov 9, 2016
Marshall was the architect of both the Allied World War II victory and key U.S. Cold War policies, most notably the European Recovery Program, known as “the Marshall Plan,” for which he received the Nobel Peace Prize. He is generally considered our greatest soldier-statesman since George Washington. By assessing his extraordinary accomplishments, character, and leadership abilities, this lecture by Mark A. Stoler attempts to explain why.
The General Marshall Story
Uploaded on Dec 12, 2009
ARC Identifier 2569675 / Local Identifier 111-TV-408. The story of General George C. Marshall, told on Army’s “THE BIG PICTURE” — This is a personal history film of General George C. Marshall who resigned from the Defense Department and settled in Leesburg, Virginia, in 1951. It is a pictorial record of his role as a public servant, spanning a critical half century, which ultimately placed him in the ranks of great American patriots. It is rare in history when a man who has distinguished his name in war goes on to greatness in peace. But for George Catlett Marshall it was a short step from a brilliant military career to his role as statesman, diplomat, and peacemaker winner of the Nobel Prize for Peace. Narrated by Walter Cronkite, and introduced by Master Sergeant Stuart Queen, “The General Marshall Story” will appeal to old and young for it has been skillfully written and produced. It approaches General Marshall’s life story from an objective viewpoint with a beguilingly fresh format, used on THE BIG PICTURE this past season in relating the General Bradley story. The same excellence that applied in the Bradley story has been carried into “The General Marshall Story.” Visually, and as a professional motion picture exploration for television into the lives of five-star Army generals, THE BIG PICTURE production staff has created a new list of subjects for forthcoming episodes in the weekly TV series. Department of Defense. Department of the Army. Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations. U.S. Army Audiovisual Center. (ca. 1974 – 05/15/1984)
Donald Trump Considering Retired General James Mattis for Defense Chief
Retired Marine general has long voiced concerns about the security threat posed by Iran
Marine Gen. James Mattis, commander, U.S. Central Command at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing in March 2013. He is said to be a possible pick to be secretary of defense, along with a handful of other retired generals.PHOTO: EVAN VUCCI/ASSOCIATED PRESS
By GORDON LUBOLD
Updated Nov. 18, 2016 4:24 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON—President-elect Donald Trump is considering several retired military generals as possible picks to be secretary of defense, people knowledgeable about the transition process said.
Retired Marine Gen. James Mattis, a former war commander who has long voiced concerns about the security threat posed by Iran, is among those being considered. Gen. Mattis is expected to visit with Mr. Trump in New Jersey, transition officials said Friday.
Gen. Mattis didn’t respond to attempts to reach him for comment.
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.) and Rep. Mike Pompeo of Kansas are among the cabinet picks announced by President-elect Donald Trump on Friday. WSJ’s Jerry Seib discusses the significance of their appointments on Lunch Break with Tanya Rivero. Photo: EPA
Also under consideration is retired Army Gen.David Petraeus, a former commander of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Army Gen. Jack Keane, who has been advising the campaign, also has been in discussions and met with the president-elect on Thursday, transition officials said.
The Trump campaign also is still considering at least three Washington hands for defense secretary, officials have said, including Jim Talent, a retired Republican senator from Missouri; Stephen Hadley, former national-security adviser under President George W. Bush; and Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.), a one-time Army captain from Arkansas who has served in the Senate since last year.
The transition office, based at Trump Tower in New York, named individuals for key posts, including GOP Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama for attorney general, Rep. Mike Pompeo of Kansas to lead the CIA, and retired Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, close Trump confidant on national security matters, as national security adviser.
U.S. law requires the Defense Department chief to come from civilian life, and retired generals are considered civilians for such purposes only after they have been out of active duty for at least seven years. Gens. Mattis and Petraeus, who both played significant roles in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, would require a congressional waiver to serve as defense secretary, since both retired within the last seven years.
Gen. Mattis, who eventually was in charge of U.S. Central Command, which oversees U.S. forces in the Middle East, has found himself at odds with the Obama administration over Iran and U.S. troop withdrawals from his area of responsibility.
Gen. Mattis, who led a task force into southern Afghanistan in 2001 and a division of Marines during the invasion of Iraq in 2003, is also known as “Mad Dog Mattis,” a colorful general known for his intellect, a penchant for speaking plainly and his vast library.
General James Mattis (Ret.) served in the United States Marine Corps from 1969 to 2013. During this time he was the 11th Commander of United States Central Command. We sat down with him and asked him your questions.
0:08 – What is the toughest decision you had to make while in the Marine Corps and did you ever regret your decision?
2:25 — How did you stay motivated throughout your Marine Corps career?
3:27 — How do you keep improving as a leader to meet the demand of each role in your career?
5:53 — There was a cold night in Afghanistan when you were walking the perimeter by yourself, greeting a bunch of young Marines. What were you thinking about?
7:16 — What is the one leadership lesson that you learned as a General grade officer that you wish you had known your whole career?
11:55 — What did you look for in your NCO’s and how should the relationship between an NCO and an officer compliment each other?
13:58 — What in your opinion is the most important leadership trait and why?
15:33 — What is the kill-casualty radius of the knife-hand?
Gen. Jack Keane talks Trump Tower national security meeting
Trump: ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis is a ‘very impressive’ candidate for defense secretary
By Phil Mattingly, CNN
President-elect Donald Trump said on Sunday he was considering retired Marine Gen. James Mattis to serve as his secretary of defense.
“General James “Mad Dog” Mattis, who is being considered for Secretary of Defense, was very impressive yesterday. A true General’s General!” Trump tweeted.
He initially enlisted in the United States Marine Corps in 1969.[7] He later earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in history from Central Washington University[8] and was commissioned a second lieutenant through ROTC on January 1, 1972.[9] During his service years, Mattis was considered to be an intellectual among the upper ranks, with his personal library numbering more than seven thousand volumes. Major General Robert H. Scales, Retired, PhD, described him as “….one of the most urbane and polished men I have known.” Reinforcing this intellectual persona was the fact he carried his own personal copy of the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius throughout his deployments.[10]
As a lieutenant, Mattis served as a rifle and weapons platoon commander in the 3rd Marine Division. As a captain, he was assigned as the Naval Academy Preparatory School’s Battalion Officer (composed of Enlisted Midshipman Candidates and its Company Officers and Enlisted Staff), commanded Rifle and Weapons Companies in the 1st Marine Regiment, then Recruiting StationPortland, Oregon, as a major.
During the initial planning for the War in Afghanistan, Mattis led Task Force 58 in operations in the southern part of the country, becoming the first Marine Corps officer to ever command a Naval Task Force in combat.[9]
While serving in Afghanistan as a brigadier general, he was known as an officer who engaged his men with “real leadership”. A young Marine officer named Nathaniel Fick cited an example of that leadership when he witnessed Mattis in a fighting hole talking with a sergeant and a lance corporal: “No one would have questioned Mattis if he’d slept eight hours each night in a private room, to be woken each morning by an aide who ironed his uniforms and heated his MREs. But there he was, in the middle of a freezing night, out on the lines with his Marines.”[11]
Iraq War
Letter written by Mattis on the eve of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, addressed to members of the 1st Marine Division.
Mattis played key roles in combat operations in Fallujah, including negotiation with the insurgent command inside the city during Operation Vigilant Resolve in April 2004, as well as participation in planning of the subsequent Operation Phantom Fury in November. In May 2004, Mattis ordered the 3 a.m. bombing of a suspected enemy safe house near the Syrian border, which later came to be known as the Mukaradeeb wedding party massacre, and which resulted in the locally-reported deaths of 42 civilian men, women and children who were attending a wedding celebration. Mattis stated that it had taken him 30 seconds to deliberate on bombing the location.[13]
Following a U.S. Department of Defense survey that showed only 55% of American soldiers and 40% of U.S. Marines would report a colleague for abusing civilians, Mattis told U.S. Marines in May 2007 that “Whenever you show anger or disgust toward civilians, it’s a victory for al-Qaeda and other insurgents.” Reflecting an understanding of the need for restraint in war as key to defeating an insurgency, he added that “Every time you wave at an Iraqi civilian, al-Qaeda rolls over in its grave.”[14]
Mattis popularized the 1st Marine Division’s motto “no better friend, no worse enemy”, a paraphrase of the famous self-made epitaph for the Roman dictatorSulla,[15] in his open letter to all men within the division for their return to Iraq. This phrase later became widely publicized during the investigation into the conduct of Lieutenant Ilario Pantano, a platoon commander serving under Mattis.[16][17][18][19][20][21]
As his division prepared to ship out, Mattis called in experts in Arab culture to lead cultural sensitivity classes. He constantly toured the battlefield to tell stories of Marines who were able to show discretion and cultural sensitivity in moments of high pressure.[22] He encouraged his men to grow mustaches to look more like the people they were working with.[22]
He also was noted for a willingness to remove senior leaders under his command at a time when the U.S. military seemed unable or unwilling to relieve under-performing or incompetent officers. During the division’s push to Baghdad, Mattis relieved Colonel Joe D. Dowdy, regimental commander of Regimental Combat Team-1, and it was such a rare occurrence in the modern military that it made the front page of newspapers. Despite this, Mattis declined to comment on the matter publicly other than to say that the practice of officer relief remains alive, or at least “We are doing it in the Marines.”[11] Later interviews of Dowdy’s officers and men revealed that “the colonel was doomed partly by an age-old wartime tension: Men versus mission—in which he favored his men” while Mattis insisted on execution of the mission to seize Baghdad swiftly.[23]
Combat Development Command
After being promoted to lieutenant general, Mattis took command of Marine Corps Combat Development Command. On February 1, 2005, speaking ad libitum at a forum in San Diego, he said “You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn’t wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain’t got no manhood left anyway. So it’s a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. Actually, it’s a lot of fun to fight. You know, it’s a hell of a hoot. It’s fun to shoot some people. I’ll be right upfront with you, I like brawling.” Mattis’s remarks sparked controversy and General Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps, issued a statement suggesting that Mattis should have chosen his words more carefully, but would not be disciplined.[24]
U.S. Joint Forces Command
The Pentagon announced on May 31, 2006 that Lieutenant General Mattis was chosen to take command of I Marine Expeditionary Force, based out of Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton.[25] On September 11, 2007, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced that President George W. Bush had nominated Mattis for appointment to the rank of general to command U.S. Joint Forces Command in Norfolk, Virginia. NATO agreed to appoint Mattis as Supreme Allied Commander Transformation. On September 28, 2007, the United States Senate confirmed Mattis’s nomination, and he relinquished command of I MEF on November 5, 2007 to Lieutenant General Samuel Helland.
Mattis was promoted to four-star general and took control of JFCOM/SACT on November 9, 2007. He transferred the job of SACT to French General Stéphane Abrial on September 9, 2009, but continued in command of JFCOM.[26]
As head of Central Command, Mattis oversaw the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and was responsible for a region that includes Syria, Iran, Yemen.[34] The Obama administration did not place much trust in Mattis, because he was perceived to be too eager for a military confrontation with Iran.[35]
He retired from the Marine Corps on May 22, 2013.
Civilian career
Since retirement from the military, Mattis has worked for FWA Consultants[36] and is an Annenberg Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution.[37] He also serves as a Member of the General Dynamics Board of Directors.[36]
In mid-2012, a Department of Defense official evaluating Theranos’s blood-testing technology for military initiated a formal inquiry with the Food and Drug Administration about the company’s intent to distribute its tests without FDA clearance. In August 2012, via email, Elizabeth Holmes, the CEO of Theranos asked Mattis, who had expressed interest in testing Theranos’s technology in combat areas, to help. Within hours, Mattis forwarded his email exchange with Holmes to military officials, asking “how do we overcome this new obstacle.”[38]
Since 2013, Mattis has been a board member of Theranos, a controversial Silicon Valley biotech company with criticized corporate governance practices.[39] In a July 2013 letter from the Department of Defense approving his possible employment by Theranos, Mattis was given permission with conditions. He was cautioned to do so only if he did not represent Theranos with regards to the blood testing device and its potential acquisition by the Departments of the Navy or Defense.[38]
On November 20, 2016, President-elect Donald Trump said that he was considering Mattis for Secretary of Defense. Trump met with Mattis for a little over one hour in Bedminster, New Jersey.[40] He later stated on Twitter, “General James “Mad Dog” Mattis, who is being considered for Secretary of Defense, was very impressive yesterday. A true General’s General!”[41]
Political views
Israeli-Palestinian peace process
Mattis supports a two-state solution model for Israel-Palestinian peace. He says the current situation in Israel is “unsustainable” and argues that the settlements harm prospects for peace and are leading to apartheid. In particular, he believes the lack of a two-state solution is upsetting to the Arab allies of America, which weakens US esteem amongst its Arab allies. Mattis strongly supports John Kerry on the Middle East peace process, praising Kerry for being wisely focused like a laser-beam towards a two-state solution[42]
Iran and Arab allies
Mattis believes that Iran is the principal threat to the stability of the Middle East, ahead of Al-Qaeda and ISIS. Mattis says: “I consider ISIS nothing more than an excuse for Iran to continue its mischief. Iran is not an enemy of ISIS. They have a lot to gain from the turmoil in the region that ISIS creates.” On the Iran nuclear deal, although he sees it as a poor agreement, he believes there is now no way to tear it up, saying: “We are just going to have to recognize that we have an imperfect arms control agreement. Second, that what we achieved is a nuclear pause, not a nuclear halt”.[43] Additionally, he criticizes President Barack Obama for being naive about Iranian intentions and Congress for being “pretty much absent” on last year’s nuclear deal.[44]
Mattis praises the friendship of regional US allies such as Jordan and the United Arab Emirates.[45] He has criticized Obama and Donald Trump for their view of seeing allies as ‘free-loading’, saying: “For a sitting U.S. president to see our allies as freeloaders is nuts.”[45] He has cited the importance of the United Arab Emirates and Jordan as countries that wanted to help, for example, in filling in the gaps in Afghanistan.[46] He has criticized current defense strategy as giving “the perception we’re pulling back” from US allies.[46] He stresses the need for the US to bolster its ties with allied intelligence agencies, particularly the intelligence agencies of Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.[47] In 2012, Mattis had been supportive of providing weapons to Syrian rebels, as a way to fight back against Iranian proxies in Syria.[48]
Personal life
Mattis is a graduate of the U.S. Marine Corps Amphibious Warfare School, U.S. Marine Corps Command and Staff College, and the National War College. Mattis is also noted for his intellectualism and interest in military history,[12] with a personal library that once included over 7,000 volumes,[1] and a penchant for publishing required reading lists for Marines under his command.[49][50] Mattis is a life-long bachelor,[51] who has never been married and has no children.[1] He is nicknamed “The Warrior Monk” because of his bachelor life, and the fact he devoted his life to studying and fighting war.[52] He is known for the intellectual rigor he puts on his Marines and his belief in risk-management, and in the need for troops under his command to read widely about the cultural norms and history of the area they are sent to, as he himself does. Before deploying to Iraq, Mattis ensured his troops were given courses on Arab culture and cultural sensitivity classes.[22]
Reynolds, Nicholas E. (2005). Basrah, Baghdad and Beyond: The U.S. Marine Corps in the Second Iraq War. p. 5. Naval Institute Press. ISBN 1-59114-717-4
Born in Uniontown, Pennsylvania, Marshall was a 1901 graduate of the Virginia Military Institute. After serving briefly as commandant of students at the Danville Military Academy in Danville, Virginia, Marshall received his commission as a second lieutenant of Infantry in February, 1902. In the years after the Spanish-American War, he served in the United States and overseas in positions of increasing rank and responsibility, including platoon leader and company commander in the Philippines during the Philippine–American War. He was the Honor Graduate of his Infantry-Cavalry School Course in 1907, and graduated first in his 1908 Army Staff College class.
In 1916 Marshall was assigned as aide-de-camp to J. Franklin Bell, the commander of the Western Department. After the United States entered World War I, Marshall served with Bell while Bell commanded the Department of the East. He was subsequently assigned to the staff of the 1st Division, and assisted with the organization’s mobilization and training in the United States, as well as planning of its combat operations in France. Subsequently assigned to the staff of the American Expeditionary Forces headquarters, he was a key planner of American operations including the Meuse-Argonne Offensive.
After the war, Marshall was assigned as an aide-de-camp to John J. Pershing, who was then serving as the Army’s Chief of Staff. He later served on the Army staff, commanded the 15th Infantry Regiment in China, and was an instructor at the Army War College. In 1927, he became assistant commandant of the Army’s Infantry School, where he modernized command and staff processes, which proved to be of major benefit during World War II. In 1932 and 1933 he commanded Fort Screven, Georgia.
Marshall commanded 5th Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division and Vancouver Barracks from 1936 to 1938, and received promotion to brigadier general. During this command, Marshall was also responsible for 35 Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) camps in Oregon and southern Washington. In July 1938, Marshall was assigned to the War Plans Division on the War Department staff, and he was subsequently appointed as the Army’s Deputy Chief of Staff. When Chief of Staff Malin Craig retired in 1939, Marshall became acting Chief of Staff, and then Chief of Staff. He served as Chief of Staff until the end of the war in 1945.
As Chief of Staff, Marshall organized the largest military expansion in U.S. history, and received promotion to five-star rank as General of the Army. Marshall coordinated Allied operations in Europe and the Pacific until the end of the war; in addition to being hailed as the organizer of Allied victory by Winston Churchill, Time magazine named Marshall its Man of the Year for 1943. Marshall retired from active service in 1945, but remained on active duty, a requirement for holders of five-star rank.[5] In late 1945 and early 1946 he served as a special envoy to China in an unsuccessful effort to negotiate a coalition government between the Nationalist of Chiang Kai-shek and Communists under Mao Zedong.
As Secretary of Defense at the start of the Korean War, Marshall worked to restore the military’s confidence and morale at the end of its post-World War II demobilization and then its initial buildup for combat in Korea and operations during the Cold War.
After resigning as Defense Secretary, Marshall retired to his home in Virginia. He died in 1959 and was buried at Arlington National Cemetery.
Following graduation from VMI in 1901, Marshall sat for a competitive examination for a commission in the U.S. Army.[14] While awaiting the results he took the position of Commandant of Students at the Danville Military Institute in Danville, Virginia.[15] Marshall passed the exam and was commissioned a second lieutenant in February, 1902.[16] Prior to World War I, he was posted to various positions in the United States and the Philippines, including serving as an infantry platoon leader and company commander during thePhilippine–American War and other guerrilla uprisings. He was schooled and trained in modern warfare, including a tour at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas from 1906 to 1910 as both a student and an instructor.[17] He was the Honor Graduate of his Infantry-Cavalry School Course in 1907, and graduated first in his 1908 Army Staff College class.[18]
After another tour of duty in the Philippines, Marshall returned to the United States in 1916 to serve as aide-de-camp to the commander of the Western Department, former Army chief of staff Major General J. Franklin Bell, at the Presidio in San Francisco. After the United States declared war on Germany in April 1917, Marshall relocated with Bell to Governors Island, New York when Bell was reassigned as commander of the Department of the East. Marshall was soon after assigned to help oversee the mobilization of the 1st Division for service in France.
World War I
During the Great War, he had roles as a planner of both training and operations. He went to France in mid-1917 as the director of training and planning for the 1st Division. In this capacity he planned the first American attack and victory of the war at Cantigny, May 28–31, 1918.[19] In mid-1918, he was posted to the headquarters of the American Expeditionary Force, where he worked closely with his mentor, GeneralJohn Joseph Pershing, and was a key planner of American operations. He was instrumental in the planning and coordination of the Meuse-Argonne Offensive, which contributed to the defeat of the German Army on the Western Frontin 1918.[20]
Between World War I and II
In 1919, he became an aide-de-camp to GeneralJohn J. Pershing. Between 1920 and 1924, while Pershing was Army Chief of Staff, Marshall worked in a number of positions in the Army, focusing on training and teaching modern, mechanized warfare. Between World Wars I and II, he was a key planner and writer in the War Department, commanded the 15th Infantry Regiment for three years in China, and taught at the Army War College. In 1927, as a lieutenant colonel, he was appointed assistant commandant of the Infantry School at Fort Benning, where he initiated major changes to modernize command and staff processes, which proved to be of major benefit during World War II. Marshall placed Edwin F. Harding in charge of the Infantry School’s publications, and Harding became editor[21]:41 of Infantry in Battle, a book that codified the lessons of World War I.Infantry in Battle is still used as an officer’s training manual in the Infantry Officer’s Course and was the training manual for most of the infantry officers and leaders of World War II.
Marshall commanded the 5th Brigade of the 3rd Infantry Division and Vancouver Barracks in Vancouver, Washington from 1936 to 1938, and was promoted to brigadier general in October 1936. In addition to obtaining a long-sought and significant troop command, traditionally viewed as an indispensable step to the pinnacle of the US Army, Marshall was also responsible for 35 Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) camps in Oregon and southern Washington. As post commander Marshall made a concerted effort to cultivate relations with the city of Portland and to enhance the image of the US Army in the region. With the CCC, he initiated a series of measures to improve the morale of the participants and to make the experience beneficial in their later life. He started a newspaper for the CCC region that proved a vehicle to promote CCC successes, and he initiated a variety of programs that developed their skills and improved their health. Marshall’s inspections of the CCC camps gave him and his wife Katherine the chance to enjoy the beauty of the American northwest and made that assignment what he called “the most instructive service I ever had, and the most interesting.”[22]
In July 1938, Marshall was assigned to the War Plans Division in Washington D.C. and subsequently reassigned as Deputy Chief of Staff. In that capacity, then-Brigadier General Marshall attended a conference at the White House at which President Rooseveltproposed a plan to provide aircraft to England in support of the war effort, lacking forethought with regard to logistical support or training. With all other attendees voicing support of the plan, Marshall was the only person to voice his disagreement. Despite the common belief that he had ended his career, this action resulted in his being nominated by PresidentFranklin Roosevelt to be the Army Chief of Staff. Upon the retirement of General Malin Craig on July 1, 1939, Marshall became acting chief of staff. Marshall was promoted to general and sworn in as Chief of Staff on September 1, 1939, the same day the German Army launched its invasion of Poland.[23] He would hold this post until the end of the war in 1945.
World War II
As Chief of Staff, Marshall organized the largest military expansion in U.S. history, inheriting an outmoded, poorly equipped army of 189,000 men and, partly drawing from his experience teaching and developing techniques of modern warfare as an instructor at theArmy War College, coordinated the large-scale expansion and modernization of the U.S. Army. Though he had never actually led troops in combat, Marshall was a skilled organizer with a talent for inspiring other officers.[24] Many of the American generals who were given top commands during the war were either picked or recommended by Marshall, including Dwight D. Eisenhower, Jacob L. Devers, George S. Patton, Terry de la Mesa Allen, Sr., Lloyd Fredendall, Leslie McNair, Mark Wayne Clark and Omar Bradley.[25]
Expands military force fortyfold
Faced with the necessity of turning an army of former civilians into a force of over eight million soldiers by 1942 (a fortyfold increase within three years), Marshall directed General Leslie McNair to focus efforts on rapidly producing large numbers of soldiers. With the exception of airborne forces, Marshall approved McNair’s concept of an abbreviated training schedule for men entering Army land forces training, particularly in regard to basic infantry skills, weapons proficiency, and combat tactics.[26][27] At the time, most U.S. commanders at lower levels had little or no combat experience of any kind. Without the input of experienced British or Allied combat officers on the nature of modern warfare and enemy tactics, many resorted to formulaic training methods emphasizing static defense and orderly large-scale advances by motorized convoys over improved roads.[28] In consequence, Army forces deploying to Africa suffered serious initial reverses when encountering German armored combat units in Africa at Kasserine Pass and other major battles.[29] Even as late as 1944, U.S. soldiers undergoing stateside training in preparation for deployment against German forces in Europe were not being trained in combat procedures and tactics in use there.[30]
Originally, Marshall had planned a 265-division Army with a system of unit rotation such as practiced by the British and other Allies.[31] By mid-1943, however, after pressure from government and business leaders to preserve manpower for industry and agriculture, he had abandoned this plan in favor of a 90-division Army using individual replacements sent via a circuitous process from training to divisions in combat.[31] The individual replacement system devised by Marshall and implemented by McNair greatly exacerbated problems with unit cohesion and effective transfer of combat experience to newly trained soldiers and officers.[29][32] In Europe, where there were few pauses in combat with German forces, the individual replacement system had broken down completely by late 1944.[33] Hastily trained replacements or service personnel reassigned as infantry were given six weeks’ refresher training and thrown into battle with Army divisions locked in front-line combat.
The new men were often not even proficient in the use of their own rifles or weapons systems, and once in combat, could not receive enough practical instruction from veterans before being killed or wounded, usually within the first three or four days.[29][34][35] Under such conditions, many replacements suffered a crippling loss of morale, while veteran soldiers were kept in line units until they were killed, wounded, or incapacitated by battle fatigue or physical illness. Incidents of soldiers AWOL from combat duty as well as battle fatigue and self-inflicted injury rose rapidly during the last eight months of the war with Germany.[29][32][34] As one historian concluded, “Had the Germans been given a free hand to devise a replacement system…, one that would do the Americans the most harm and the least good, they could not have done a better job.”[34][36]
Marshall’s abilities to pick competent field commanders during the early part of the war was decidedly mixed. While he had been instrumental in advancing the career of the able Dwight D. Eisenhower, he had also recommended the swaggering Lloyd Fredendall to Eisenhower for a major command in the American invasion of North Africa during Operation Torch. Marshall was especially fond of Fredendall, describing him as “one of the best” and remarking in a staff meeting when his name was mentioned, “I like that man; you can see determination all over his face.” Eisenhower duly picked him to command the 39,000-man Central Task Force (the largest of three) in Operation Torch. Both men would come to regret that decision, as Fredendall was the leader of U.S. Army forces at the disastrous Battle of the Kasserine Pass.[25]
Planned invasion of Europe
Cover to the book Infantry in Battle, the World War II officer’s guide to infantry combat operations. Marshall directed production of the book, which is still used as a reference today.
During World War II, Marshall was instrumental in preparing the U.S. Army and Army Air Forces for the invasion of the European continent. Marshall wrote the document that would become the central strategy for all Allied operations in Europe. He initially scheduled Operation Overlord for April 1, 1943, but met with strong opposition from Winston Churchill, who convinced Roosevelt to commit troops to Operation Husky for the invasion of Italy. Some authors think that World War II could have ended one year earlier if Marshall had had his way; others think that such an invasion would have meant utter failure. This argument is justifiable, as it is true that the German Army in 1943 was overstretched, and defensive works in Normandy were not ready.[37]
It was assumed that Marshall would become the Supreme Commander of Operation Overlord, but Roosevelt selected Dwight Eisenhower as Supreme Commander. While Marshall enjoyed considerable success in working with Congress and President Franklin D. Roosevelt, he refused to lobby for the position. President Roosevelt didn’t want to lose his presence in the states. He told Marshall, “I didn’t feel I could sleep at ease if you were out of Washington.”[38] When rumors circulated that the top job would go to Marshall, many critics viewed the transfer as a demotion for Marshall, since he would leave his position as Chief of Staff of the Army and lose his seat on theCombined Chiefs of Staff.[39]
On December 16, 1944, Marshall became the first American Army general to be promoted to five-star rank, the newly created General of the Army – the American equivalent rank to field marshal. He was the second American to be promoted to a five-star rank, as William Leahy was promoted to fleet admiral the previous day.
Throughout the remainder of World War II, Marshall coordinated Allied operations in Europe and the Pacific. He was characterized as the organizer of Allied victory by Winston Churchill. Time magazine named Marshall Man of the Year for 1943. Marshall resigned his post of Chief of Staff in 1945, but did not retire, as regulations stipulate that Generals of the Army remain on active duty for life.[5]
Analysis of Pearl Harbor intelligence failure
After World War II ended, the Congressional Joint Committee on the Investigation of the Pearl Harbor Attack received testimony on the intelligence failure. It amassed 25,000 pages of documents, 40 volumes, and included nine reports and investigations, eight of which had been previously completed. These reports included criticism of Marshall for delay in sending General Walter Short, the Army commander in Hawaii, important information obtained from intercepted Japanese diplomatic messages. The report also criticized Marshall’s lack of knowledge of the readiness of the Hawaiian Command during November and December 1941. Ten days after the attack, Lt. General Short and Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, commander of the Navy at Pearl Harbor, were both relieved of their duties. The final report of the Joint Committee did not single out or fault Marshall. While the report was critical of the overall situation, the committee noted that subordinates had failed to pass on important information to their superiors, including Marshall.[40][41]
Post War: China
In December 1945, President Harry Trumansent Marshall to China, much to the dismay of his wife, Katherine, who later said “They kept taking my George away from me”, to broker a coalition government between the Nationalist allies under Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek and Communists under Mao Zedong. Marshall had no leverage over the Communists, but he threatened to withdraw American aid essential to the Nationalists. Both sides rejected his proposals and the Chinese Civil War escalated, with the Communists winning in 1949. His mission a failure, he returned to the United States in January 1947.[42][43] Chiang Kai-shek and some historians later claimed that cease-fire, under pressure of Marshall, saved the Communists from defeat.[44][45] As Secretary of State in 1947–48, Marshall seems to have disagreed with strong opinions in The Pentagon and State Department that Chiang’s success was vital to American interests, insisting that U.S. troops not become involved.
Secretary of State and Nobel Peace Prize
Medallion issued in 1982 to honor George Marshall’s post-war work for Europe
After Marshall’s return to the U.S. in early 1947, Truman appointed Marshall Secretary of State. He became the spokesman for the State Department’s ambitious plans to rebuild Europe. On June 5, 1947 in a speech[46] atHarvard University, he outlined the American proposal. The European Recovery Program, as it was formally known, became known as the Marshall Plan. Clark Clifford had suggested to Truman that the plan be called the Truman Plan, but Truman immediately dismissed that idea and insisted that it be called the Marshall Plan.[47][48] The Marshall Plan would help Europe quickly rebuild and modernize its economy along American lines. TheSoviet Union forbade its satellites to participate.
Marshall during World War II
Marshall was again named Time’s Man of the Year for 1947. He received the Nobel Peace Prize for his post-war work in 1953, the only career officer in United States Army to ever receive this honor.
As Secretary of State, Marshall strongly opposed recognizing the state of Israel. Marshall felt that if the state of Israel was declared that a war would break out in the Middle East (which it did in 1948 one day after Israel declared independence). Marshall saw recognizing the Jewish state as a political move to gain Jewish support in the upcoming election, in which Truman was expected to lose to Dewey. He told President Truman in May 1948, “If you (recognize the state of Israel) and if I were to vote in the election, I would vote against you.”[49][50][51] However, Marshall refused to vote in any election as a matter of principle.[52]
When the early months of the Korean War showed how poorly prepared the Defense Department was, President Truman fired Secretary Louis A. Johnson and named Marshall as Secretary of Defense in September 1950. The appointment required a congressional waiver because the National Security Act of 1947 prohibited a uniformed military officer from serving in the post. This prohibition included Marshall since individuals promoted to General of the Army are not technically retired, but remain officially on active duty even after their active service has concluded. Marshall’s main role as Secretary of Defense was to restore confidence and morale while rebuilding the armed forces following their post-World War II demobilization.
Marshall worked to provide more manpower to meet the demands of both the Korean War and the Cold War in Europe. To implement his priorities Marshall brought in a new leadership team, including Robert A. Lovett as his deputy and Anna M. Rosenberg, former head of the War Manpower Commission, as assistant secretary of defense for manpower. He also worked to rebuild the relationship between the Defense and State Departments, as well as the relationship between the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Marshall participated in the post-Inchon landing discussion that led to authorizing Douglas MacArthur to conduct operations in North Korea. A secret “eyes only” signal from Marshall to MacArthur on September 29, 1950 declared the Truman administration’s commitment: “We want you to feel unhampered strategically and tactically to proceed north of the 38th Parallel”. At the same time, Marshall advised against public pronouncements which might lead to United Nations votes undermining or countermanding the initial mandate to restore the border between North and South Korea. Marshall and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were generally supportive of MacArthur because they were of the view that field commanders should be able to exercise their best judgment in accomplishing the intent of their superiors.
Following Chinese military intervention in Korea during late November, Marshall and the Joint Chiefs of Staff sought ways to aid MacArthur while avoiding all-out war with China. In the debate over what to do about China’s increased involvement, Marshall opposed a cease–fire on the grounds that it would make the U.S. look weak in China’s eyes, leading to demands for future concessions. In addition, Marshall argued that the U.S. had a moral obligation to honor its commitment to South Korea. When British Prime Minister Clement Attlee suggested diplomatic overtures to China, Marshall opposed, arguing that it was impossible to negotiate with the Communist government. In addition, Marshall expressed concern that concessions to China would undermine confidence in the U.S. among its Asian allies, including Japan and the Philippines. When some in Congress favored expanding the war in Korea and confronting China, Marshall argued against a wider war in Korea, continuing instead to stress the importance of containing the Soviet Union during the Cold War battle for primacy in Europe.
Increasingly concerned about public statements from General Douglas MacArthur, commander of United Nations forces fighting in the Korean War, which contradicted President Harry S. Truman‘s on prosecution of the war, on the morning of 6 April 1951 Truman held a meeting with Marshall, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Omar Bradley, Secretary of State Acheson and advisor W. Averell Harriman to discuss whether MacArthur should be removed from command.
Harriman was emphatically in favor of MacArthur’s relief, but Bradley opposed it. Marshall asked for more time to consider the matter. Acheson was in favor but did not disclose this, instead warning Truman that if he did it, MacArthur’s relief would cause “the biggest fight of your administration.” At another meeting the following day, Marshall and Bradley continued to oppose MacArthur’s relief. On 8 April, the Joint Chiefs of Staff met with Marshall, and each expressed the view that MacArthur’s relief was desirable from a “military point of view,” suggesting that “if MacArthur were not relieved, a large segment of our people would charge that civil authorities no longer controlled the military.”
Marshall, Bradley, Acheson and Harriman met with Truman again on 9 April. Bradley informed the President of the views of the Joint Chiefs, and Marshall added that he agreed with them. Truman wrote in his diary that “it is of unanimous opinion of all that MacArthur be relieved. All four so advise.”[54] (The Joint Chiefs would later insist that they had only “concurred” with the relief, not “recommended” it.)
On April 11, 1951, President Truman directed transmittal of an order to MacArthur, issued over Bradley’s signature, relieving MacArthur of his assignment in Korea and directing him to turn over command to Matthew Ridgway. In line with Marshall’s view, and those of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, MacArthur’s relief was looked upon by proponents as being necessary to reassert the tenet of civilian control of the military.
Marshall’s reputation for excellence as a military organizer and planner was recognized early in his career, and became known throughout the Army. In a performance appraisal prepared while Marshall was a lieutenant in the Philippines, his superior, Captain E. J. Williams responded to the routine question of whether he would want the evaluated officer to serve under his command again by writing of Marshall “Should the exigencies of active service place him in exalted command I would be glad to serve under him.” (Emphasis added.)[55]
In 1913 General Johnson Hagood, then a lieutenant colonel, completed a written evaluation of Marshall’s performance in which he called Marshall a military genius. Responding to the question of whether he would want his subordinate Marshall to serve under him again, Hagood wrote “Yes, but I would prefer to serve under his command.” (Emphasis added.)[56]
In addition to his military success, Marshall is primarily remembered as the driving force behind the Marshall Plan, which provided billions in aid to post war Europe to restart the economies of the destroyed countries. In recent years, the cooperation required between former European adversaries as part of the Marshall Plan has been recognized as one of the earliest factors that led to formation of the European Coal and Steel Community, and eventually the European Union.[57]
In a television interview after leaving office, Harry S. Truman was asked which American he thought had made the greatest contribution of the preceding thirty years. Without hesitation, Truman picked Marshall, adding “I don’t think in this age in which I have lived, that there has been a man who has been a greater administrator; a man with a knowledge of military affairs equal to General Marshall.”[58]
Orson Welles said in an interview with Dick Cavett that “Marshall is the greatest man I ever met… I think he was the greatest human being who was also a great man… He was a tremendous gentleman, an old fashioned institution which isn’t with us anymore.”[59]
Family life
Marshall married Elizabeth Carter Coles, or “Lily”, on Letcher Avenue at her mother’s home in Lexington, Virginia, in 1902. She died in 1927 after a successful surgery that put significant strain on her weak heart. They never had any children together.
In 1930, Marshall married Katherine Boyce Tupper (October 8, 1882 – December 18, 1978), widow of Baltimore lawyer Clifton Stevenson Brown, who was murdered by a disgruntled client, and the mother of three children. One of Marshall’s stepsons with Tupper was US Army Lieutenant Allen Tupper Brown, who was killed by a German sniper in Italy on May 29, 1944. Another stepson was Major Clifton Stevenson Brown, Jr. (1914–1952). Step-daughter Molly Brown Winn, who is the mother of actress Kitty Winn, was married to US Army Major James J. Winn (former aide to General Marshall).
Marshall was a Freemason, having been made a Mason “at sight” in 1941 by the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of the District of Columbia. [60]
George Marshall maintained a home, known as Dodona Manor and later The Marshall House (now restored), in Leesburg, Virginia.[61] This was his first and only permanent residence owned by Marshall who later said “this is Home…a real home after 41 years of wandering.”[62] The home and its surrounding gardens are open to the public as a museum with a goal of forwarding Marshall’s leadership qualities and legacy.
1960 George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, originally the Army Ballistics Missile Agency at Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville Alabama, became a NASA field center and was renamed.
The British Parliament established the Marshall Scholarship in recognition of Marshall’s contributions to Anglo-American relations.
Many buildings and streets throughout the U.S. and other nations are named in his honor.
George C. Marshall Award, the highest award given to a chapter in Kappa Alpha Order.
George C. Marshall High School, founded in 1962 and located in Falls Church, Virginia, is the only public high school in the United States named for Marshall. The nickname of the school – “The Statesmen” – appropriately reflects his life and contributions.
The Marshall Elementary School is in the Laurel Highlands School District, Uniontown, Pennsylvania.
George C. Marshall Elementary School: located in Vancouver, Washington.
The George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany
George Catlett Marshall Medal, awarded by the Association of the United States Army. Awarded to Bob Hope in 1972.
Bibliography
Behrman, Greg. The Most Noble Adventure: The Marshall Plan and How America Helped Rebuild Europe. New York: Free Press, 2008.
Cray, Ed. General of the Army: George C. Marshall, Soldier and Statesman. Norton, 1990. 847 pp.
Harold I. Gullan; “Expectations of Infamy: Roosevelt and Marshall Prepare for War, 1938–41.” Presidential Studies Quarterly Volume: 28#3 1998. pp 510+ online edition
Hein, David. “General George C. Marshall: Why He Still Matters.” Marshall magazine (George C. Marshall Foundation, Lexington, VA), Fall 2016, pp. 12-17.
Jordan, Jonathan W., American Warlords: How Roosevelt’s High Command Led America to Victory in World War II (NAL/Caliber 2015).
Levine, Steven I. “A New Look at American Mediation in the Chinese Civil War: the Marshall Mission and Manchuria.” Diplomatic History 1979 3(4): 349–375. ISSN0145-2096
Parrish, Thomas. Roosevelt and Marshall: Partners in Politics and War. 1989. 608 pp.
Forrest Pogue, Viking, (1963–87) Four-volume authorized biography: complete text is online
Story 2: Trump Greets and Meets Media At Trump Tower — Big Lie Media Ride The Golden Elevator Up To Trump — Videos
REPORT: Trump having ‘off the record’ meeting with big media executives today
News anchors and media executives summoned to Trump Tower
Trump Complains To Media About Unflattering Pictures
Pres Elect Meets With Cabinet Candidates Americas News
Trump Meeting With Mainstream Media Executive – Intelligence Report (FULL SHOW 11/21/2016)
Donald Trump Meeting Media At Trump Tower | Power Lunch | CNBC
Donald Trump’s media summit was a ‘f—ing firing squad’
By Emily Smith and Daniel Halper
November 21, 2016
Donald Trump scolded media big shots during an off-the-record Trump Tower sitdown on Monday, sources told The Post.
“It was like a f–ing firing squad,” one source said of the encounter.
“Trump started with [CNN chief] Jeff Zucker and said ‘I hate your network, everyone at CNN is a liar and you should be ashamed,’ ” the source said.
“The meeting was a total disaster. The TV execs and anchors went in there thinking they would be discussing the access they would get to the Trump administration, but instead they got a Trump-style dressing down,” the source added.
A second source confirmed the fireworks.
“The meeting took place in a big board room and there were about 30 or 40 people, including the big news anchors from all the networks,” the other source said.
“Trump kept saying, ‘We’re in a room of liars, the deceitful dishonest media who got it all wrong.’ He addressed everyone in the room calling the media dishonest, deceitful liars. He called out Jeff Zucker by name and said everyone at CNN was a liar, and CNN was [a] network of liars,” the source said.
“Trump didn’t say [NBC reporter] Katy Tur by name, but talked about an NBC female correspondent who got it wrong, then he referred to a horrible network correspondent who cried when Hillary lost who hosted a debate – which was Martha Raddatz who was also in the room.”
The stunned reporters tried to get a word in edgewise to discuss access to a Trump Administration.
Donald Trump scolded media big shots during an off-the-record Trump Tower sitdown on Monday, sources told The Post.
“It was like a f–ing firing squad,” one source said of the encounter.
“Trump started with [CNN chief] Jeff Zucker and said ‘I hate your network, everyone at CNN is a liar and you should be ashamed,’ ” the source said.
“The meeting was a total disaster. The TV execs and anchors went in there thinking they would be discussing the access they would get to the Trump administration, but instead they got a Trump-style dressing down,” the source added.
A second source confirmed the fireworks.
“The meeting took place in a big board room and there were about 30 or 40 people, including the big news anchors from all the networks,” the other source said.
“Trump kept saying, ‘We’re in a room of liars, the deceitful dishonest media who got it all wrong.’ He addressed everyone in the room calling the media dishonest, deceitful liars. He called out Jeff Zucker by name and said everyone at CNN was a liar, and CNN was [a] network of liars,” the source said.
“Trump didn’t say [NBC reporter] Katy Tur by name, but talked about an NBC female correspondent who got it wrong, then he referred to a horrible network correspondent who cried when Hillary lost who hosted a debate – which was Martha Raddatz who was also in the room.”
The stunned reporters tried to get a word in edgewise to discuss access to a Trump Administration.
“[CBS Good Morning co-host Gayle] King did not stand up, but asked some question, ‘How do you propose we the media work with you?’ Chuck Todd asked some pretty pointed questions. David Muir asked ‘How are you going to cope living in DC while your family is in NYC? It was a horrible meeting.”
Trump spokeswoman Kellyanne Conway told reporters the gathering went well.
“Excellent meetings with the top executives of the major networks,” she said during a gaggle in the lobby of Trump Tower. “Pretty unprecedented meeting we put together in two days.”
The meeting was off the record, meaning the participants agreed not to talk about the substance of the conversations.
The hour-long session included top execs from network and cable news channels. Among the attendees were NBC’s Deborah Turness, Lester Holt and Chuck Todd, ABC’s James Goldston, George Stephanopoulos, David Muir and Martha Raddatz,
Also, CBS’ Norah O’Donnell John Dickerson, Charlie Rose, Christopher Isham and King, Fox News’ Bill Shine, Jack Abernethy, Jay Wallace, Suzanne Scott, MSNBC’s Phil Griffin and CNN’s Jeff Zucker and Erin Burnett.
Arthur Sulzberger, publisher of The New York Times, plans to meet with Trump Tuesday.
There was no immediate comment from the Trump Team.
Several media executives and news anchors made the trip to Trump Tower in Manhattan Monday afternoon for a meeting with President-elect Donald Trump for what was characterized as a “reset” gathering.
The executives and anchors spotted in the lobby of his Fifth Avenue headquarters included CNN’s Wolf Blitzer and CNN’s president, Jeff Zucker, executives from Fox News as well as CBS News’ Charlie Rose, John Dickerson, Norah O’Donnell and Gayle King. After the meeting, top Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway called the meeting “excellent” and “unprecedented.”
“Excellent meeting with the top executives and anchors of the major networks – ABC, CBS, NBC – which of course includes MSNBC, Fox News and CNN represented,” Conway told reporters at Trump Tower. “Pretty unprecedented meeting we pulled together in two days.”
Conway also said the meeting was a kind of “reset” button on relations with the media, though Conway also said “there’s no need to mend fences.”
“It was an off the record meeting, very cordial, very productive, genial. But it was also very candid and very honest,” she said. “From my perspective, it’s great to hit the ‘reset’ button. It was a long, hard-fought campaign. Donald Trump proved that he animated America, he understood American and now he will be president to all Americans.”
Before the election, when Trump was lagging in the polls, there were reports that he was considering launching a Trump TV network after the election. During the campaign, Trump railed against what he called “the dishonest media” at campaign rallies.
On Tuesday, Mr. Trump will meet with the New York Times and other publications, according to Conway.
Trump was also meeting Monday with Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown, who’s interested in being veterans affairs secretary; Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, former Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, who’s also Mitch McConnell’s wife; and former Speaker Newt Gingrich, who was a surrogate for Mr. Trump during the campaign.
Story 1: Trump Selects Senator Session As Attorney General To Enforce The Law Including Immigration, National Security and Public Corruption — Criminal Illegal Aliens and Clintons Getting Out of Dodge — Three Cheers For Senator Sessions — Will Obama Pardon Clinton For Her Many Crimes? Yes — Videos —
Trump picks Senator Jeff Sessions for attorney general
Will Sen. Sessions receive backlash at confirmation hearing?
Jeff Sessions: A look at Trump’s Attorney General pick
Senator Jeff Sessions on Immigration Enforcement
SR 1349 – Sessions Picked by Trump for Attorney General
Sessions: Omnibus Explains Why ‘Voters Are In Open Rebellion’
Schumer, Sessions spar over immigration, employment
Sen Jeff Sessions (R-AL) Helped Donald Trump Craft Newly Released Immigration Plan – The Kelly File
FULL Jeff Sessions Gives A Fantastic Speech At The NRA-ILA Leadership Forum May 20th 2016
Jeff Sessions Shreds Jeh Johnson DHS Immigration Policy…
Building Trump Team – Rpt: Sen Sessions Accepts Attorney General Post – Fox & Friends
Breaking News: Donald Trump Selects Senator Jeff Sessions for Attorney General
Questions raised about Trump’s choice for attorney general, Senator Jeff Sessions
President-elect Donald Trump announced Friday that he plans to nominate Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) as attorney general.(Thomas Johnson/The Washington Post)
In Donald Trump’s world, most roads, it seems, lead back to Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), President-elect Trump’s pick for attorney general.
After Sessions became one of the first members of Congress to endorse Trump this February, he became an adviser on almost every major decision and policy proposal Trump made during the campaign:
–A top Sessions aide helped Trump communicate his immigration policy
–Sessions chaired Trump national security advisory committee
–Sessions advised Trump on who to choose for vice president. (Sessions was also in the running himself for the No. 2 job.)
“The president-elect has been unbelievably impressed with Senator Sessions and his phenomenal record as Alabama’s attorney general and U.S. attorney,” a Trump transition statement released Thursday read. “It is no wonder the people of Alabama re-elected him without opposition.”
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., talks with reporters as he arrives at Trump Tower Monday. (AP Photo/ Evan Vucci)
In a relatively short time, Sessions has elevated himself from back-bencher to a “arguably one of the top 5 power players in the country now,” said Alabama GOP consultant Brent Buchanan. Here’s crash course in a politician likely to be a pivotal figure in Trump’s administration:
The basics: Sessions has served as a senator from Alabama for two decades. But Alabama is such a loyal state to its top lawmakers that Sessions is actually the junior senator from the state; Sen. Richard Shelby (R) has been in office three decades.
Sessions is popular back home: Aside from his first election in 1996, Sessions has never won with less than 59 percent of the vote. In 2014, he ran unopposed.
His full name is: Jefferson Beauregard “Jeff” Sessions III.
He’s “amnesty’s worst enemy”: The conservative National Review crowned Sessions with that title in 2014, with good reason. Sessions has opposed nearly every immigration bill that has come before the Senate the past two decades that has included a path to citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally.
He’s also fought legal immigration, including guest worker programs for illegal immigrants and visa programs for foreign workers in science, math and high-tech. In 2007, Sessions got a bill passed essentially banning for 10 years federal contractors who hire illegal immigrants.
Young Americans still know the value of hard work and are driven to help others. Watch one 18-year-old’s story.
“Legal immigration is the primary source of low-wage immigration into the United States,” Sessions argued in a 2015 Washington Post op-ed. “… What we need now is immigration moderation: slowing the pace of new arrivals so that wages can rise, welfare rolls can shrink and the forces of assimilation can knit us all more closely together.”
Sessions endorses Trump in February (John Bazemore/AP)
He’s a debt hawk and a military hawk: Sessions, a lawyer before he became a politician, is known for touring Alabama with charts warning of the United States’ “crippling” debt. On foreign policy, Sessions has advocated a get-tough approach, once voting against an amendment banning “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment” of prisoners.
These are two positions that could put him at odd with the president he’ll serve: Trump has expensive plans that involve significant spending, like $1 trillion on an infrastructure program — and he campaigned on a strong non-interventionist worldview (often claiming, inaccurately, that he opposed the Iraq War before it started).
He’s a climate change skeptic: Here’s Sessions in a 2015 hearing questioning Environmental Protection Agency’s Gina McCarthy: “Carbon pollution is CO2, and that’s really not a pollutant; that’s a plant food, and it doesn’t harm anybody except that it might include temperature increases.”
Accusations of racism have dogged Sessions’s career: Actually, they almost derailed it. In 1986, a Senate committee denied Sessions, then a 39-year-old U.S. attorney in Alabama, a federal judgeship. His former colleagues testified Sessions used the n-word and joked about the Ku Klux Klan, saying he thought they were “okay, until he learned that they smoked marijuana.”
By the time the testimony was finished, Sessions’s “reputation was in tatters,” wrote Isaac Stanley-Becker in The Post this July, on the eve of Sessions delivering a prime-time speech at the Republican National Convention for Trump.
In 1986, Sessions defended himself against accusations of racism. “I am not the Jeff Sessions my detractors have tried to create,” he told the very same Senate Judiciary Committee he now sits on. “I am not a racist. I am not insensitive to blacks.”
And he told Stanley-Becker this summer: “Racism is totally unacceptable in America. Everybody needs to be treated fairly and objectively.”
But the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Heidi Beirich, who tracks hate speech, said Sessions is guilty of it, and that his mere presence in Trump’s inner circle is “a tragedy for American politics.”
He’s got a populist streak: Here’s one area where he and Trump likely get along swell. Wall Street and corporate executives are often the antagonists in the Alabama senator’s speeches. “A small group of CEOs don’t get to set immigration policy for the country,” he said in a 2014 speech opposing a multi-billion-dollar bill to help control the stem of influx of Central American refugees on the border.
As hard-line as Sessions can be, he’s worked with Democrats before: “Say what you will about him,” former longtime Senate Democratic communications aide Jim Manley told the Almanac of American Politics. “He was always nice to [the late Ted] Kennedy and other Democrats as well.”
Even people who have run against him have nice things to say about him. Stanley-Becker talked to Susan Parker, a Democrat who tried to unseat Sessions in 2002. During a debate, she asked for a tissue and Sessions handed her one. She joked she would use it to dry her eyes when Sessions made her cry, and he responded: “Please don’t say that. That’s my nightmare. I promise I’ll be nice.”
Sessions has joined with Democrats to support criminal justice reform legislation like reducing the disparity between sentence time for crack and powder cocaine (although civil rights advocates say more recently he opposed a bipartisan criminal justice reform package that in part reduced federal sentences.) In 2010 he teamed up with Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) on a proposal to put strict limits on non-military federal spending. It fell one vote short of passing.
5-Minute Fix newsletter
Keeping up with politics is easy now.
Sign up
Sen. Jeff Sessions endorses Donald Trump
EmbedShare
Play Video2:43
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) endorsed Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s White House bid during a joint appearance in his home state. (Reuters)
In 2016, he’s gone from fringe to mainstream: Aside from immigration battles, Sessions mostly operated in the background on Capitol Hill. Until 2016. His mix of hard-line immigration position and a populist streak had made him a tea party star and thus a coveted endorsement catch for Republican presidential candidates catering to the tea party. In presidential primary debates, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) would even brag about his ties to Sessions.
In the end, Sessions chose Trump, surprising the political establishment by jumping on stage with him at a rally in February in Madison, Ala., two days before Super Tuesday and donning a “Make America Great Again” hat.
“I told Donald Trump this isn’t a campaign, this is a movement,” Sessions said at the time.
Nine months later, Sessions will be a central figure in transitioning that “movement” into a working government
Will Jeff Sessions Roll Back Civil-Rights Protections?
Donald Trump’s pick for attorney general has a record of hostility toward the federal government’s role in curtailing discrimination on the basis of race, sexuality, and immigration status.
Mike Segar / Reuters
By ADAM SERWER
Senator Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, a man whose views on race once led a Senate committee to deem him unfit for a federal judgeship, is Donald Trump’s choice to head the federal agency that enforces the nation’s civil-rights laws.
In his 1986 confirmation hearing, witnesses testified that Sessions referred to a black attorney as “boy,” described the Voting Rights Act as “intrusive,” attacked the NAACP and ACLU as “un-American” for “forcing civil rights down the throats of people,” joked that he thought the Ku Klux Klan was ok until he found out they smoked marijuana, and referred to a white attorney who took on voting-rights cases as a “traitor to his race.” As Ryan J. Reilly reported, Sessions also faced allegations that he referred to a Democratic official in Alabama as a nigger.
“It’s unimaginable that Senator Sessions would be the chief law enforcement officer for the nation’s civil rights laws,” said Sherrilyn Ifill, director of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. “This demonstrates that the president-elect is continuing to select individuals for his team that have a demonstrated record of hostility to equal rights and justice, and to civil rights.”
The Justice Department does far more than prosecute federal crimes. It is the primary federal agency responsible for ensuring that Americans’ rights are protected regardless of race, religion, disability, or gender. It ensures that Americans have the right to vote; that they can find a place to live, work, or get an education without discrimination; that local law enforcement agencies do not violate the constitutional rights of the communities they police; and that the nation’s civil-rights laws are defended and preserved in court.
Defenders of Sessions might argue that his racist views may have changed, that he has reformed, that the sins of Sessions’s past should not bear on his future. After all, Sessions has made many statements since in favor of racial egalitarianism, and even said in 2010 that the work of the civil-rights division “provides tremendous benefit to American citizens.”
Yet the evidence that Sessions’s views on law and policy have changed is thin. Since becoming a senator, Sessions has denounced federal efforts to protect the rights of marginalized Americans as intrusive, decried the extension of equal rights to gays and lesbians as a threat to Western civilization, and fought to preserve punitive laws in the face of a bipartisan trend toward criminal-justice reform. Sessions’s selection as attorney general augurs an era in which the federal agency charged with protecting the rights of women, ethnic and religious minorities, and LGBT Americans will be led by a man who has been openly skeptical of, if not opposed, to its past efforts to do so. Which means that Sessions’s tenure as attorney general could leave some of the most vulnerable Americans defenseless, should he conclude that the civil-rights laws that protect them are not worth enforcing.
The choice of Sessions, a hardliner who has long criticized the Obama administration’s immigration policy as too lenient and opposed the bipartisan Senate immigration reform bill, also suggests that Trump has every intention of engaging in the massive crackdown on immigration he advertised during his campaign.
“The attorney general occupies the most important law-enforcement role in the nation and, as such, must be someone committed to equal justice under law for all,” said Kristen Clarke, president of the Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights. “There were questions about [Sessions] ability to be fair and impartial on the bench back then and those questions remain today.”
Under President George W. Bush, the political appointees to the Justice Department’s civil-rights division were found in an internal investigation to have violated civil-service laws by considering partisan affiliation in hiring. The head of the division, Bradley Schlozman, declared his intent in an email to “gerrymander those crazy libs out of the section,” referring to the part of the division that enforces voting rights. He wanted to replace them with “real Americans” and “right-thinking Americans.” A 2009 report from the Government Accountability Office found a “significant drop in the enforcement of several major antidiscrimination and voting rights laws.” While civil-rights enforcement lagged, many of the division’s lawyers were instead compelled by the Bush leadership to work deportation cases.
Under the Obama administration, enforcement of the nation’s civil-rights laws again became a top priority, with the division taking on the racially discriminatory financial practices that lead to the 2008 financial crisis, more forcefully enforcing and defending votingrights laws, and moving against anti-LGBT discrimination, particularly in schools.
Sessions was considered as a possible running mate for Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump in the 2016 election, but Mike Pence of Indiana was ultimately selected for the ticket. On November 18, 2016, the transition team announced via press release that President-elect Trump had picked Sessions as his designee for Attorney General.
Early life and education
Sessions was born in Hybart, Alabama[1] on December 24, 1946, the son of Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, Jr and Abbie Powe.[2] His father owned a general store in Hybart, Alabama and then a farm equipment dealership. Both of Sessions’ parents were of primarily English ancestry, with some Scots-Irish.[3][4] In 1964, Sessions became an Eagle Scout and earned the Distinguished Eagle Scout Award. [5]
Sessions entered private practice in Russellville and later in Mobile,[8] where he now lives.[9] He also served in the Army Reserve in the 1970s, achieving the rank of captain.[8]
Sessions and his wife Mary have three children and six grandchildren.[10]
In 1986, Reagan nominated Sessions to be a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama.[11] Sessions’s judicial nomination was recommended and actively backed by Republican Alabama Senator Jeremiah Denton.[12] A substantial majority of the American Bar Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, which rates nominees to the federal bench, rated Sessions “qualified,” with a minority voting that Sessions was “not qualified”.[13]
Thomas Figures, a black Assistant U.S. Attorney, testified that Sessions said he thought the Ku Klux Klan was “OK until I found out they smoked pot“. Sessions later said that the comment was not serious, but did apologize for it.[15] Figures also testified that on one occasion, when the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division sent the office instructions to investigate a case that Sessions had tried to close, Figures and Sessions “had a very spirited discussion regarding how the Hodge case should then be handled; in the course of that argument, Mr. Sessions threw the file on a table, and remarked, ‘I wish I could decline on all of them,'” by which Figures said Sessions meant civil rights cases generally. After becoming Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, Sessions was asked in an interview about his civil rights record as a U.S Attorney. He denied that he had not sufficiently pursued civil rights cases, saying that “when I was [a U.S. Attorney], I signed 10 pleadings attacking segregation or the remnants of segregation, where we as part of the Department of Justice, we sought desegregation remedies”.[16]
Figures also said that Sessions had called him “boy.”[11] He also testified that “Mr. Sessions admonished me to ‘be careful what you say to white folks.'”[17] In 1992, Figures was indicted by a federal grand jury with attempting to bribe a witness by offering a $50,000 to a convicted drug dealer who was to testify against his client. Figures claimed the indictment was in retaliation for his role in blocking Sessions nomination.[18]Sessions was also reported to have called a white civil rights attorney a “disgrace to his race.”[19]
Sessions responded to the testimony by denying the allegations, saying his remarks were taken out of context or meant in jest, and also stating that groups could be considered un-American when “they involve themselves in un-American positions” on foreign policy. Sessions said during testimony that he considered the Klan to be “a force for hatred and bigotry.” In regards to the marijuana quote, Sessions said the comment was a joke but apologized.[15]
In response to a question from Joe Biden on whether he had called the NAACP and other civil rights organizations “un-American”, Sessions replied “I’m often loose with my tongue. I may have said something about the NAACP being un-American or Communist, but I meant no harm by it.”[13]
On June 5, 1986, the Committee voted 10–8 against recommending the nomination to the Senate floor, with Republican Senators Charles Mathias of Maryland and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania voting with the Democrats. It then split 9–9 on a vote to send Sessions’ nomination to the Senate floor with no recommendation, this time with Specter in support. A majority was required for the nomination to proceed.[20] The pivotal votes against Sessions came from his home state’s Democratic Senator Howell Heflin of Alabama. Although Heflin had previously backed Sessions, he began to oppose Sessions after hearing testimony, concluding that there were “reasonable doubts” over Sessions’ ability to be “fair and impartial.” The nomination was withdrawn on July 31, 1986.[13]
Sessions became only the second nominee to the federal judiciary in 48 years whose nomination was killed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.[15] He was quoted then as saying that the Senate on occasion had been insensitive to the rights and reputation of nominees.[21][22] A law clerk from the U.S. District Court in Mobile who had worked with Sessions later acknowledged the confirmation controversy, but stated that he observed Sessions as “a lawyer of the highest ethical and intellectual standards.”[23]
After joining the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sessions remarked that his presence there, alongside several of the members who voted against him, was a “great irony.”[21] When Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania left the GOP to join the Democratic Party on April 28, 2009, Sessions was selected to be the Ranking Member on the Senate Judiciary Committee. At that time, Specter said that his vote against Sessions’ nomination was a mistake, because he had “since found that Sen. Sessions is egalitarian.”[24]
Alabama Attorney General and U.S. Senate
Sessions speaking at a campaign event for Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump on August 31, 2016.
Sessions was elected Attorney General of Alabama in November 1994, unseating incumbent Democrat Jimmy Evans with 57% of the vote. In 1996, Sessions won the Republican primary for U.S. Senate, after a runoff, and then defeated Democrat Roger Bedford 53%–46% in the November general election.[6] He succeeded Howell Heflin, who had retired after 18 years in the Senate. In 2002, Sessions won reelection by defeating Democratic State Auditor Susan Parker. In 2008, Sessions defeated Democratic State SenatorVivian Davis Figures (sister-in-law of Thomas Figures, the Assistant U.S. Attorney who testified at Sessions’ judicial confirmation hearing) to win a third term. Sessions received 63 percent of the vote to Figures’ 37 percent. Sessions successfully sought a fourth term in 2014[25] and was uncontested in both the Republican primary and the general election.[26][27]
Sessions was only the second freshman Republican senator from Alabama since Reconstruction and gave Alabama two Republican senators, a first since Reconstruction. He was easily reelected in 2002, becoming the first Republican reelected to the Senate from Alabama since Reconstruction (given that his colleague Richard Shelby, who won reelection as a Republican in 1998, had previously run as a Democrat, switching parties in 1994).[26]
2016 presidential election
Sessions was an early supporter of the presidential candidacy of Donald Trump, and was a major policy adviser to the Trump campaign, especially in regard to immigration and national security.[28] Sessions donned a “Make America Great Again” cap at a Trump rally in August 2015, and Stephen Miller, Sessions’s longtime-communications director, joined the Trump campaign.[29] On February 28, 2016, Sessions officially endorsed Donald Trump for president. The Trump campaign considered Sessions for the position of running mate, and Sessions was widely seen as a potential Cabinet secretary in a Trump administration.[28] After winning the presidential election, Trump announced that he would nominate Sessions to be Attorney General, succeeding Loretta Lynch.[30]
Political positions
U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions addressing voters in 2011.
Sessions was ranked by National Journal as the fifth-most conservative U.S. Senator in their March 2007 Conservative/Liberal Rankings.[31] He backs conservative Republican stances on foreign policy, taxes, and social issues. He opposes abortion and illegal immigration.
Sessions was a supporter of the “nuclear option,” a tactic considered by then-Senate Majority LeaderBill Frist in the spring of 2005 to change longstanding Senate rules to stop Democratic filibusters (or, “talking a bill to death”) of some of George W. Bush’s nominees to the federal courts. When the “Gang of 14” group of moderate Senators reached an agreement to allow filibusters under “extraordinary circumstances,” Sessions accepted the agreement but argued that “a return to the tradition of up-or-down votes on all judicial nominees would… strengthen the Senate.”[33]
Senator Sessions speaks during Army Aviation Association of America (AAAA) 2012 in Nashville, TN
In 2005, Sessions spoke at a rally in Washington, D.C. in favor of the War in Iraq that was held in opposition to an anti-war protest held the day before. Sessions said of the anti-war protesters: “The group who spoke here the other day did not represent the American ideals of freedom, liberty and spreading that around the world. I frankly don’t know what they represent, other than to blame America first.”[35]
In the 109th Congress, Sessions introduced legislation to increase the death gratuity benefit for families of servicemembers from $12,420 to $100,000.[36] The bill also increased the level of coverage under the Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance from $250,000 to $400,000. Sessions’ legislation was accepted in the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2005.[37]
Sessions was one of only three senators to vote against additional funding for the VA medical system. He opposed the bill due to cost concerns and indicated that Congress should instead focus on “reforms and solutions that improve the quality of service and the effectiveness that is delivered.”[38]
Crime and security
Senator Sessions and Indiana Governor/VP candidate Mike Pence at an immigration policy speech in Phoenix, Arizona in August 2016
On October 5, 2005, he was one of nine Senators who voted against a Senate amendment to a House bill that prohibited cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment or punishment of individuals in the custody or under the physical control of the United States Government.[39]
Sessions has taken a strong stand against any form of citizenship for undocumented immigrants. Sessions was one of the most vocal critics of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007. He is a supporter of E-Verify, the federal database that allows businesses to electronically verify the immigration status of potential new hires,[40] and has advocated for expanded construction of a Southern border fence.[41] In 2013, Sessions claimed that an opt-out provision in immigration legislation before Congress would allow Sec. Janet Napolitano to skip building a border fence. PolitiFact called the claim “False,” stating that the provision would allow Napolitano to determine where the fence was built, but not opt out of building it entirely.[42]
In November 2010, Sessions was a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee when the committee voted unanimously in favor of the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act, and sent the bill to the full Senate for consideration.[43] The proposed law would allow the Attorney General to ask a court to issue a restraining order on Internet domain names that host copyright-infringing material.[43]
Sessions has been a strong supporter of civil forfeiture, the government practice of seizing property when it has allegedly been involved in a crime.[44] Sessions opposes “any reform” of civil forfeiture legislation.[45]
Economic issues
Sessions voted for the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts, and said he would vote to make them permanent if given the chance.[46]
In 2006, Sessions received the “Guardian of Small Business” award from the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB),[47] an honor that the organization bestows upon legislators who vote in accord with its stance on small business issues at least 70% of the time.[48] He was recognized by the NFIB again in 2008[49] and 2010;[48] in 2014 the organization endorsed him in his run for a fourth term, noting that he had achieved a 100% NFIB voting record on key issues for small businesses in the 112th Congress.[50]
He voted for an amendment to the 2008 budget resolution, offered by Republican Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina, which would have placed a one-year moratorium on the practice of earmarking.[citation needed]
Sessions was one of 25 senators to vote against the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (the bank bailout), arguing that it “undermines our heritage of law and order, and is an affront to the principle of separation of powers.”[51]
Sessions opposed the $837 billion stimulus bill, calling it “the largest spending bill in the history of the republic.”[52] In late 2011 he also expressed skepticism about the $447 billion jobs bill proposed by President Obama, and disputed the notion that the bill would be paid for without adding to the national debt.[53]
Higher education and research
In 2013, Sessions sent a letter to National Endowment for the Humanities enquiring why the foundation funded projects that he deemed frivolous.[54] He also criticized the foundation for distributing books related to Islam to hundreds of U.S. libraries, saying “Using taxpayer dollars to fund education program grant questions that are very indefinite or in an effort to seemingly use Federal funds on behalf of just one religion, does not on its face appear to be the appropriate means to establish confidence in the American people that NEH expenditures are wise.”[55]
Social issues
As Attorney General of Alabama, Sessions worked to deny funding to student Gay-Straight Alliances at Auburn University and The University of South Alabama, stating “an organization that professes to be comprised of homosexuals and/or lesbians may not receive state funding or use state-supported facilities to foster or promote those illegal, *1551 sexually deviate activities defined in the sodomy and sexual misconduct laws.” [56]The U.S. District court ruled against these actions as a violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Sessions has been an opponent of same-sex marriage and has earned a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign, the United States’ largest LGBTQ advocacy group.[57] He voted against the Matthew Shepard Act, which added acts of bias-motivated violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity to federal hate-crimes law,[58] Sessions voted in favor of advancing the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004 and 2006, a U.S. constitutional amendment which would have permanently restricted federal recognition of marriage to those between a man and a woman.[58] Sessions voted against the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act of 2010.[59]
Sessions has also said regarding the appointment of a gay Supreme Court justice, “I do not think that a person who acknowledges that they have gay tendencies is disqualified, per se, for the job”[60] but “that would be a big concern that the American people might feel—might feel uneasy about that.”[61]
Sessions is against legalizing cannabis for either recreational or medicinal use. “I’m a big fan of the DEA”, he said during a hearing with the Senate Judiciary Committee.[62] Sessions was “heartbroken” and found “it beyond comprehension” when President Obama claimed that cannabis is not as dangerous as alcohol.[63]
Following Senator Ted Cruz‘s 21-hour speech opposing the Affordable Care Act, Sessions joined Cruz and 17 other Senators in a failed vote against cloture on a comprehensive government funding bill that would have continued funding healthcare reform.[67]
Sessions is a staunch opponent of marijuana legalization. In April 2016, he said that it was important to foster “knowledge that this drug is dangerous, you cannot play with it, it is not funny, it’s not something to laugh about… and to send that message with clarity that good people don’t smoke marijuana.”[71]
Supreme Court nominations
While serving as the ranking member on the Judiciary Committee in the 110th Congress, Sessions was the senior Republican who questioned Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Barack Obama‘s nominee to succeed retiring Justice David Souter. Sessions focused on Sotomayor’s views on empathy as a quality for a judge, arguing that “empathy for one party is always prejudice against another.”[72] Sessions also questioned the nominee about her views on the use of foreign law in deciding cases,[73] as well as her role in the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF). On July 28, 2009, Sessions joined five Republican colleagues in voting against Sotomayor’s nomination in the Judiciary Committee. The committee approved Sotomayor by a vote of 13–6.[74] Sessions also voted against Sotomayor when her nomination came before the full Senate. He was one of 31 senators (all Republicans) to do so, while 68 voted to confirm the nominee.[75]
Sessions also served as the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee during the nomination process for Elena Kagan, President Obama’s nominee to succeed retired Justice John Paul Stevens. Sessions based his opposition on the nominee’s lack of experience, her background as a political operative (Kagan had said that she worked in the Clinton White House not as a lawyer but as a policy adviser[76]), and her record on guns, abortion, and gay rights. Sessions pointed out that Kagan “has a very thin record legally, never tried a case, never argued before a jury, only had her first appearance in the appellate courts a year ago.”[77]
Sessions focused the majority of his criticism on Kagan’s treatment of the military while she was dean of Harvard Law School. During her tenure, Kagan reinstated the practice of requiring military recruiters to coordinate their activities through a campus veterans organization, rather than the school’s Office of Career Services. Kagan argued that she was trying to comply with a law known as the Solomon Amendment, which barred federal funds from any college or university that did not grant military recruiters equal access to campus facilities. Sessions asserted that Kagan’s action was a violation of the Solomon Amendment and that it amounted to “demeaning and punishing the military.”[78] He also argued that her action showed a willingness to place her politics above the law.[78]
On July 20, 2010, Sessions and five Republican colleagues voted against Kagan’s nomination. Despite this, the Judiciary Committee approved the nomination by a 13–6 vote. Sessions also voted against Kagan in the full Senate vote, joining 36 other senators (including one Democrat) in opposition. 63 senators voted to confirm Kagan. Following the vote, Sessions remarked on future nominations and elections, saying that Americans would “not forgive the Senate if we further expose our Constitution to revision and rewrite by judicial fiat to advance what President Obama says is a broader vision of what America should be.”[79]
Following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016, Sessions refused to consider any nominee for the position. Sessions maintained his opposition after President Obama nominated D.C. Circuit judge Merrick Garland, joining other Republican Senators in delaying a Supreme Court hearing until the inauguration of a new president.[80]
Legislation
On December 11, 2013, Sessions cosponsored the Victims of Child Abuse Act Reauthorization Act of 2013 (S. 1799; 113th Congress), a bill that would reauthorize the Victims of Child Abuse Act of 1990 and would authorize funding through 2018 to help child abuse victims.[81] Sessions argued that “there is no higher duty than protecting our nation’s children, and this bill is an important step to ensure the most vulnerable children receive the care and support they deserve.”[81]
Political contributors
During his career, Sessions’ largest donors have come from the legal, health, real estate, and insurance industries.[82] From 2005 to 2010, the corporations employing donors who gave the most to his campaign were the Southern Company utility firm, Balch & Bingham law firm, Harbert Management investment firm, Drummond Company coal mining firm, and WPP Group, a UK-based communications services company.[83]
Story 2: Trump Selects Representative Mike Pompeo As Central Intelligence Agency Director and General Michael Flynn As National Security Adviser — Videos
Lt. General Michael Flynn Becomes National Security Adviser – Kelly File (FULL SHOW 11/17/2016)
Donald Trump Names Kansas Rep. Mike Pompeo His Pick for CIA Director
Mike Pompeo: A look at Trump’s pick for CIA director
Mike Pompeo Dismantles Every Lie Hillary Clinton Says Under Oath “Disturbing”
Trey Gowdy & Mike Pompeo answer questions on Benghazi, politics & Hillary Clinton
Michael Flynn: A closer look at Trump’s national security adviser
Former Ambassador To Iraq ‘Concerned’ Over Michael Flynn As National Security Adviser | MSNBC
Donald Trump Picks Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn As National Security Advisor
Lieutenant General Michael T. Flynn
LT Flynn spoke to a packed crowd of Young America’s Foundation’s students and supporters at the Trump Hotel in Washington, D.C. to celebrate freedom.
“Field of Fight” with Ret. Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn
He was one of the most respected intel officers of his generation. Now he’s leading ‘Lock her up’ chants.
By Dana Priest and Greg Miller
Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn speaks in Cleveland on the first day of the Republican National Convention. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
In campaign appearances for Donald Trump, retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn has cast the presidential race as a continuation of the career he spent battling dangerous enemies in distant wars.
“The enemy camp in this case is Hillary Rodham Clinton,” he said at a rally in Florida this month, pointing his thumbs down in disgust. “This is a person who does not know the difference between a lie and the truth. . . . She is somebody who will leave Americans behind on the battlefield.”
As chants of “Lock her up!” rose from the crowd, Flynn nodded with enthusiasm and said he was “so proud, standing up here, to be an American.”
It was a jarring moment in a race full of them — a retired three-star general comparing a presidential candidate to the al-Qaeda militants he faced in Afghanistan and Iraq, calling for a former senator and secretary of state to be imprisoned.
The appearance was only the latest eyebrow-raising episode involving Flynn, 56, who was one of the most respected military intelligence officers of his generation but who has spurned the decorum traditionally expected of retired U.S. flag officers and become the only national security figure of his rank and experience to publicly align himself with Trump, the Republican nominee.
The unruly 2016 campaign has drawn dozens of former senior national security officials into the fray, including 50 who served Republican presidents and who this month signed a lettersaying Trump “lacks the character, values and experience” to be president. Denunciations of Trump from retired Marine Gen. John Allen — who spoke at the Democratic National Convention — and former acting CIA director Michael J. Morell struck some as compromising their former institutions’ apolitical role in American democracy.
But Flynn, who vaulted to public attention with his speech at the Republican National Convention last month, has rattled even some of his most long-standing colleagues, engaging in harsh, partisan rhetoric that, to his critics, seems to clash with the principles and values he spent a career defending.
He has called President Obama a “liar,” declared the U.S. justice system “corrupt” and insisted that he was pushed out of his assignment as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency because of his views on radical Islam. The claim has left former superiors seething, including Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., according to current and former officials who said Flynn was removed because of management problems.
Like Trump, Flynn has advocated forging closer ties with Russia. In interviews with The Washington Post, Flynn acknowledged being paid to give a speech and attend a lavish anniversary party for the Kremlin-controlled RT television network in Moscow last year, where he was seated next to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“People went crazy,” said retired Brig. Gen. Peter B. Zwack, a former U.S. military attache in Moscow. “They thought it was so out of bounds, so unusual.” Zwack emphasized that he considers Flynn a “patriot” who “would never sell out his country.”
Flynn, who was no longer in government but received a DIA briefing on Russia before the trip, said the invitation and payment came through his speaker’s bureau. He said he used the visit to press for collaboration on Syria, Iran and the Middle East, and dismissed the ensuing controversy as “boring.” Asked why he would want to be so closely associated with a Kremlin propaganda platform, Flynn said he sees no distinction between RT and other news outlets.
“What’s CNN? What’s MSNBC? Come on!” said Flynn, who also has appeared occasionally as an unpaid on-air analyst for RT and other foreign broadcasters.
Flynn, center left, sits next to Russian President Vladimir Putin at an event last year to mark the Kremlin-controlled RT television network’s 10th anniversary. (Michael Klimentyev/Sputnik via Associated Press)
Dismayed by Flynn’s behavior since he left the military, former colleagues have contacted him to urge him to show more restraint. Among them are retired Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who relied heavily on Flynn in Iraq and Afghanistan, and retired Adm. Michael Mullen, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. McChrystal declined to comment for this article.
Mullen provided a written statement saying that “for retired senior officers to take leading and vocal roles as clearly partisan figures is a violation of the ethos and professionalism of apolitical military service.” Officers are sworn to execute orders without regard for political positions, an oath to the Constitution that “is inviolable and presidents must never question it or doubt it,” he said.
Flynn and Allen “have violated this principle and confused that clarity,” Mullen said. “This is not about the right to speak out, it is about the disappointing lack of judgment in doing so for crass partisan purposes. This is made worse by using hyperbolic language all the while leveraging the respected title of ‘general.’ ”
Allen noted that retired U.S. military officers have frequently taken public positions in presidential campaigns, including a number of recent chairmen, and that he did so out of concern with Trump’s calls for resuming the use of torture, killing families of terrorism suspects and mass-bombing cities in Syria.
“Retired senior officers should not take lightly the impact of public commentary in a political environment,” Allen said. “I chose to do so because I believe that Trump was proposing policies and orders to the U.S. military as a potential Commander in Chief, which I believed would create a civil-military crisis. This is a matter of conscience for me, because in moments of crisis such as these, credible voices must speak out.”
In interviews, Flynn said he respects his former superiors but rejected their entreaties as attempts to silence him and impinge on his free speech rights. “When someone says, ‘You’re a general, so you have to shut up,’ ” he said, “I say, ‘Do I have to stop being an American?’ ”
Flynn dismisses his critics as closet Clinton supporters or misguided colleagues who have put their pursuit of corporate board seats and lucrative consulting contracts ahead of their concern for the country. Most retired generals “are afraid to speak out,” he said, because they use their stars “for themselves, for their businesses.”
Flynn said his foray into politics began last year when he volunteered to advise five Republican candidates. He said that he first met Trump 11 months ago and that he spoke with him by phone several times before being asked to speak at the Republican convention.
Trump is a “very serious guy. Good listener. Asked really good questions,” he said. Flynn’s role in the campaign has yet to be defined. He said he has never met with Trump’s foreign policy adviser, Carter Page, and has not been promised any position if the real estate developer wins.
Flynn’s credentials and backing of Trump have fueled speculation that he could be in line for a high-level national security job if Trump is elected. He was briefly considered a potential Trump running mate before the candidate picked Indiana Gov. Mike Pence.
Rather than scaling back, Flynn, a registered Democrat, has become an avid campaigner for Trump whose views and impulses increasingly echo those of the Republican candidate.
He sees the nation as beset by darkness and corruption, with voters split between “centrist nationalists” and “socialists.”
The divide has weakened the nation’s ability to grasp what he considers an existential threat from “a diseased component” of Islam. “There’s something going on in the Muslim world,” he said. “Why do we have heightened security at our airports? It’s not because the Catholic Church is falling apart.”
Flynn’s sudden political prominence represents a departure from a 33-year military career spent largely in the shadowy realm of military intelligence and Special Operations missions. Former colleagues said they could not recall Flynn ever discussing politics while in uniform or voicing the views he has embraced since his career came to an abrupt end.
The son of a World War II and Korean War veteran, Flynn was one of nine children in a close-knit Irish family in Rhode Island. His brother Charlie is a two-star general in the Army.
Flynn’s early years in uniform coincided with the end of the Cold War, but he made his mark after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, as an intense officer with a string of important intelligence assignments.
Flynn, then director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, testifies on Capitol Hill in 2014. (Lauren Victoria Burke/Associated Press)
He has held senior positions in the 18th Airborne Corps, at the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon and at U.S. Central Command, which runs U.S. military operations in the Middle East. Throughout his career, he was viewed as a charismatic and unconventional officer with a talent for mapping terrorist networks — qualities prized by superiors. But his hard-charging approach was at times considered disruptive or undisciplined.
He is best known for his integral role in the lethal machine that McChrystal assembled in Iraq to eviscerate the al-Qaeda affiliate there. Together, they perfected an approach known as “find, fix, finish” that relied on the elite Joint Special Operations Command to carry out raids and then used intelligence from captured militants and materials to identify new targets at a blistering tempo.
When McChrystal was put in charge of the war in Afghanistan, he tapped Flynn again to serve as his top intelligence officer. Flynn used that job to position himself as a gifted strategist, helping to co-write a 26-page article, “Fixing Intel,” that depicted the intelligence-gathering mission in Afghanistan as a failing endeavor that was too focused on finding targets rather than understanding cultural complexities. Some in the military praised the article as insightful, but critics considered it grandstanding at the expense of his predecessors.
Some of Flynn’s other moves angered superiors. Former U.S. officials said he was scolded after traveling to Pakistan in 2009 or early 2010 and revealing to Pakistani officials sensitive U.S. intelligence on the militant Haqqani network accused of staging attacks on American forces. U.S. officials said that the move was aimed at prodding Pakistan to crack down on the militant group, but that Flynn exposed U.S. intelligence capabilities that only helped Pakistan protect an organization it used as a proxy ally.
Flynn also came under investigation by the Pentagon because of an allegation that he had inappropriately shared highly classified intelligence with Australian and British forces. “I’m proud of that one,” Flynn said in an interview. “Accuse me of sharing intelligence in combat with our closest allies. Please!”
The inquiry delayed but did not derail Flynn’s ascent through the ranks. Always pushing for a deeper understanding of terrorist networks, Flynn persuaded Clapper in 2011 to let him form a team to reexamine the materials recovered from bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan, searching for clues overlooked by the CIA. In 2012, Obama tapped him for one of the highest positions a military intelligence officer can attain, running the Defense Intelligence Agency.
U.S. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testifies during a House Appropriations hearing on “World Wide Threats” on Capitol Hill on Feb. 25. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)
Flynn arrived with a mandate for change. He began trying to reorganize the agency into regionally focused centers, station more analysts overseas and build a spying capability that could rival that of the CIA. In public remarks, he warned any employees who resisted his agenda that he would “move them or fire them.”
Almost from the outset there were concerns at the Pentagon that Flynn was struggling to execute his reform plans and that the agency was beset by turmoil. A career staff officer, Flynn had little experience running a large organization, let alone a plodding institution such as the DIA, with nearly 20,000 employees.
Former subordinates at the DIA said Flynn was so prone to dubious pronouncements that senior aides coined a term — “Flynn facts” — for assertions that seemed questionable or inaccurate.
The DIA job is ordinarily a three-year assignment. But early in Flynn’s second year, his bosses — Clapper and then-Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Michael G. Vickers — summoned him to a meeting at the Pentagon to tell him that he was being removed.
As the search for a replacement stalled, Flynn attempted an end-run around his superiors, appealing directly to the vice chief of staff of the Army to extend his tenure. The move infuriated Clapper, according to former officials who said the DNI warned Flynn that if he made any other attempt to circumvent the outcome he would be fired on the spot. Clapper declined to comment for this article, but several current and former officials confirmed the account.
Flynn disputed the account as well as the claim that he had shared sensitive intelligence with Pakistan, saying in an email that the claims are “all false.”
He characterizes his ouster as a political purge orchestrated by an administration unwilling to heed the warnings he was sounding about militant Islam. Asked for evidence, he said, “I just know!” adding that Clapper had once told him that the issue behind Flynn’s ouster was “not your leadership, or I would have removed you right away.”
The decision to remove Flynn was “about turbulence and a destructive climate,” said a former senior U.S. intelligence official. “I don’t think anybody in the administration was even aware of his views” on radical Islam.
Flynn’s positions have become more strident since he left DIA and are increasingly aimed at Obama. He said he is “sick and tired” of the president taking credit for approving the 2011 mission that led to the death of bin Laden. “This decision to kill bin Laden . . . so what?!” he said. “What did it really do?”
Once firmly against waterboarding and other banned interrogation measures, Flynn now appears at least willing to consider supporting Trump’s threat to reinstate those methods, saying he would be reluctant to take options off the table. Asked on Al Jazeera in May whether he would allow the military to carry out Trump’s threat to kill any families of suspected terrorists, Flynn replied, “I would have to see the circumstances of that situation.”
In February, Flynn posted a video about a Pakistani terrorist group on his Twitter account with the comment: “Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL.”
In the book, Flynn argues that the United States needs new partnerships with Middle Eastern countries and a deeper understanding of radical ideology. He said Egypt, Jordan, Qatar and Saudi Arabia should shoulder more of the responsibility for ridding themselves of terrorists, accept more Syrian refugees and deploy troops in Syria.
Asked whether his comments about Islam or Trump’s behavior — threatening to ban Muslims from entering the United States, vilifying the parents of a fallen Muslim American soldier — might alienate those potential Middle East partners, Flynn said, “I don’t see it that way. I see a lot of Muslims who actually want this conversation. They want this point to be made.”
Greg Jaffe and Julie Tate contributed to this report.
Flynn was born in Middletown, Rhode Island in December 1958,[1] the son of Helen Frances (Andrews), who worked in real estate, and Charles Francis Flynn, a banker.[13][14][15][16] The Flynns were an Irish Catholic family, Michael Flynn’s grandfather, also Charles Flynn, having been born in 1889 in Blacklands, Fivemiletown, County Tyrone, and later settling in Rhode Island after emigrating to the United States in 1913.[17][18][19][20]
Flynn served as the assistant chief of staff, G2, XVIII Airborne Corps at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, from June 2001 and the director of intelligence, Joint Task Force 180 in Afghanistan until July 2002. He commanded the 111th Military Intelligence Brigade from June 2002 to June 2004.[3]
Flynn speaks during the change of directorship for the Defense Intelligence Agency on Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling in Washington, D.C.
On April 17, 2012, President Barack Obama nominated Flynn to be the 18th director of the Defense Intelligence Agency.[22][23] Flynn took command of the DIA in July 2012.[24] In October 2012, Flynn announced plans to release his paper “VISION2020: Accelerating Change Through Integration”, a broad look at how the Defense Intelligence Agency must transform to meet the national security challenges for the 21st Century.[25] It was meant to emphasize “integration, interagency teamwork and innovation of the whole workforce, not just the technology but the people.” [26]
On April 30, 2014, Flynn announced his retirement effective later in 2014, about a year earlier than he had been scheduled to leave his position. He was reportedly effectively forced out of the DIA after clashing with superiors over his allegedly chaotic management style and vision for the agency.[27][28] According to what Flynn had told in one final interview as DIA director, he felt like a lone voice in thinking that the United States was less safe from the threat of Islamic terrorism in 2014 than it was prior to the 9/11 attacks; he went on to believe that he was pressed into retirement for questioning the Obama administration’s public narrative that Al Qaeda was close to defeat.[29] According to the New York Times, Flynn exhibited a loose relationship with facts, leading his subordinates to refer to Flynn’s repeated dubious assertions as “Flynn facts”.[30] He retired as of August 7.
Flynn, along with son Michael G. Flynn, runs Flynn Intel Group which provides intelligence services for business and governments.[31] Several sources, including Politico, have written that Flynn’s consulting company is allegedly lobbying for Turkey. A company tied to Erdogan’s government, which supports Muslim Brotherhood, is known to have hired Flynn’s lobbying firm.[32][33][34][35][36][37] On election day 2016, Flynn wrote an op-ed calling for U.S. backing for Erdogan’s government and criticized the regime’s opponent, Fethullah Gulen; Flynn did not disclose that Flynn’s consulting firm had received funds from a company with ties to Erdogan’s government.[38]
Flynn sat in on classified national security briefings with then-candidate Trump at the same time that Flynn was working for foreign clients, which raises ethical concerns and conflicts of interest.[39]
Attendance of RT Gala Dinner
In 2015, Flynn attended a gala dinner in Moscow in honor of RT, a Russian government-owned English-language propaganda outlet on which he made semi-regular appearances as an analyst after he retired from U.S. government service. Before the gala, Flynn gave a paid talk on world affairs.[40][41] Flynn defended the Russian payment in an interview with Michael Isikoff.[41] Journalist Michael Crowley of Politico reported that “at a moment of semi-hostility between the U.S. and Russia, the presence of such an important figure at Putin’s table startled” U.S. officials.[40]
2016 U.S. presidential election
Flynn at a campaign rally for then-Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump, in October 2016.
As one of the keynote speakers during the first night of the 2016 Republican National Convention Flynn gave what the Los Angeles Times described as a “fiery” speech, in which he stated: “We are tired of Obama’s empty speeches and his misguided rhetoric. This, this has caused the world to have no respect for America’s word, nor does it fear our might”;[11] he also accused Obama of choosing to conceal the actions of Osama bin Laden and ISIS.[46] Flynn went on to critically address political correctness and joined the crowd in a chant of “U-S-A! U-S-A!”. During the chants he told those in the audience, “Get fired up! This is about our country.”[11][47] During the speech, Flynn also joined chants of “Lock her up!”, referring to the Democratic presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, and stated that she should quit the presidential race.[48][49] He repeated in subsequent interviews that she should be “locked up”.[50] While campaigning for Trump, Flynn also referred to Clinton as the “enemy camp”.[48]
Flynn was once opposed to waterboarding and other extreme interrogation techniques that have now been banned; however, according to an August 2016 Washington Postarticle, he said at one point, in the context of Trump’s apparent openness to reinstating such techniques, that “he would be reluctant to take options off the table.”[48] In May 2016, Flynn was asked by an Al Jazeerareporter if he would support Trump’s stated plan to kill the families of suspected terrorists. In response, Flynn stated, “I would have to see the circumstances of that situation”.[48] In an interview with Al Jazeera, Flynn criticized the reliance on drones as a “failed strategy”, stating that “what we have is this continued investment in conflict. The more weapons we give, the more bombs we drop, that just … fuels the conflict.”[51][52]
On November 18, 2016, Flynn accepted president-elect Donald Trump’s offer of the position of National Security Advisor.[53]
Political view
Flynn is a registered Democrat, having grown up in a “very strong Democratic family”.[54] However, he was a keynote speaker during the first night of the 2016 Republican National Convention,[11] and he is a surrogate and top national security adviser for president-elect Donald Trump.
During a July 10, 2016 interview on ABC News’ This Week, when asked by host Martha Raddatz about the issue of abortion, Flynn stated, “women have to be able to choose.”[54][55] The next day, Flynn said on Fox News that he is a “pro-life Democrat”.[56]
Flynn has been a board member of ACT! for America[53] and sees the Muslim faith as one of the root causes of Islamist terrorism.[57] He has described Islam as a political ideology and a cancer,[57][58] and stated in Twitter that the “fear of Muslims is RATIONAL [sic].”[53] Initially supportive of Trump’s proposal to ban Muslims from entering the US, Flynn later told Al Jazeera that a blanket ban was unworkable and has called instead for “vetting” of entrants from countries like Syria.[53]
In a review of Flynn’s book The Field of Fight,Will McCants of the Brookings Institution described Flynn’s worldview as a confused combination of neoconservatism (an insistence on destroying what he sees as an alliance of tyranny, dictatorships, and radical Islamist regimes) and realism (support for working with “friendly tyrants”).[59]
Flynn is also the recipient of the Congressionally approved Ellis Island Medal of Honor and the 2012 Association of Special Operations Professionals Man of the Year award.
The Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and Its Allies, with Michael Ledeen, was published by St. Martin’s Press in 2016.[62]
Story 3: Will Trump Offer Mitt Romney The Secretary of State Position? Romney is A Progressive Interventionist, Trump’s First Big Mistake? — — Let Romney Cleanup The Mess At The Veterans Administration — Videos Videos
Mitt Romney leaves after meeting with Donald Trump in NJ. (11-19-16)
Romney: Veterans Hospitals Need Competition, Standards
Trump unveils plan to help veterans and reform the VA
Romney Donated Thousands of Pints of Milk Weekly to a Veteran’s Shelter for 2 Years ~ Anonymously
Published on Sep 25, 2012
Mitt Romney anonymously donated 7,000 pints of milk, at 1/2 price, weekly to the New England Center for Homeless Veterans for 2 Years. This homeless shelter for veterans is in an old VA hospital in downtown Boston. When the milkman retired he finally told the staff at the shelter that the donor was Mitt Romney. The former director of the homeless shelter, Ken Smith, tells the full story in an interview that aired on “The Blaze TV” on Friday, September 14, 2012. I hope to have that interview uploaded soon.
Donald Trump vows to ‘pick up the phone’ on VA …
Will Rudy Giuliani, John Bolton and Laura Ingraham Join Trump’s Administration?
Rand Paul Explains Why Rudy Giuliani Or John Bolton Are Horrible Choices For Secretary Of State
Rand Paul on Donald Trump Appointing Mitt Romney
Rand Paul Considers National Security Possibles | Morning Joe | MSNBC
Mitt Romney Considered For Secretary Of State | MSNBC
Donald Trump Considering Mitt Romney For Secretary Of State | TODAY
And Suddenly Mitt Romney Is Back In Washington – The Factor (FULL SHOW 11/17/2016)
Mark Levin: Mitt Romney is now being considered for Secretary of State… (November 17 2016)
MittvMitt.com: The story of two men trapped in one body
Mitt Romney: Trump ‘A con man, a fake’ [FULL SPEECH]
Donald Trump’s Full Response to Mitt Romney Speech (3-3-16)
What Reince Priebus Did To Ron Paul.. Spin This One
Donald Trump’s Top 20 insults that are True
Mitt Romney
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the American politician. For the American football player who went by the same name, see Milton Romney.
After stepping down from Bain Capital and his local leadership role in the LDS Church, Romney ran as the Republican candidate in the 1994 Massachusetts election for U.S. Senate. Upon losing to longtime incumbent Ted Kennedy, he resumed his position at Bain Capital. Years later, a successful stint as President and CEO of the Salt Lake Organizing Committee for the 2002 Winter Olympics led to a relaunch of his political career.
Romney has three elder siblings; Margo, Jane, and Scott (Mitt followed them after a gap of nearly six years).[12] His parents named him after a family friend, businessman J. Willard Marriott, and his father’s cousin, Milton “Mitt” Romney, a former quarterback for the Chicago Bears.[13] Romney was referred to as “Billy” until kindergarten, when he indicated a preference for “Mitt”.[14] In 1953, the family moved from Detroit to the affluent suburb of Bloomfield Hills.[15] His father became the chairman and CEO of American Motors the following year, soon helping the company avoid bankruptcy and return to profitability.[15] By 1959, his father had become a nationally known figure in print and on television,[16] and the youngster idolized him.[17]
Romney attended public elementary schools until the seventh grade, when he enrolled as one of only a few Mormon students at Cranbrook School, a traditional private boys’ preparatory school.[14][18] Many students there came from backgrounds even more privileged than his.[19] Not particularly athletic, he also did not distinguish himself academically.[17] He participated in his father’s successful 1962 Michigan gubernatorial campaign,[20] and later worked for him as an intern in the Governor’s office.[17][21] Romney took up residence at Cranbrook when his newly elected father began spending most of his time at the state capitol.[18]
At Cranbrook, Romney helped manage the ice hockey team, and he joined the pep squad.[18] During his senior year, he joined the cross country running team.[14] He belonged to eleven school organizations and school clubs overall, including the Blue Key Club, a booster group he had started.[18] During his final year there, he improved academically but fell short of excellence.[17][19] Romney became involved in several pranks while attending Cranbrook. He has since apologized, stating that some of the pranks may have gone too far.[nb 1]In March of his senior year, he began dating Ann Davies; she attended the private Kingswood School, the sister school to Cranbrook.[19][26] The two became informally engaged around the time of his June 1965 graduation.[17][22]
University, France mission, marriage, and children: 1965–75
In July 1966, he left the U.S. for a thirty-month stay in France as a Mormon missionary,[17][30] a traditional rite of passage in his family.[nb 3] He arrived in Le Havre, where he shared cramped quarters under meager conditions.[10][32] Rules against drinking, smoking, and dating were strictly enforced.[10] Most individual Mormon missionaries do not gain many converts[nb 4] and Romney was no exception:[32] he later estimated ten to twenty for his entire mission.[37][nb 5] He initially became demoralized and later recalled it as the only time when “most of what I was trying to do was rejected.”[32] He soon gained recognition within the mission for the many homes he called on and the repeat visits he was granted.[10] He was promoted to zone leader in Bordeaux in early 1968, and soon thereafter became assistant to the mission president in Paris.[10][32][39] Residing at the Mission Home for several months, he enjoyed a mansion far more comfortable than the lodgings he had elsewhere in the country.[39] When the French expressed opposition to the U.S. role in the Vietnam War, Romney debated them in return, and his views were reinforced by those who yelled and slammed their doors.[10][32]
Mitt’s father George (pictured here in a 1968 poster) lost the Republican presidential nomination to Richard M. Nixon and later was appointed to the Nixon cabinet.
Mitt’s mother Lenore (promoted here on a button) lost a Senate race in 1970, and he worked for her campaign.
In June 1968, an automobile he was driving in southern France was hit by another vehicle, seriously injuring him and killing one of his passengers, the wife of the mission president.[nb 6] Romney was not at fault in the accident.[nb 6] He became co-president of a mission that had become demoralized and disorganized after the May 1968 general strike and student uprisings and the car accident.[40] With Romney rallying the others, the mission met a goal of 200 baptisms for the year, the most for them in a decade.[40] By the end of his stint in December 1968, he was overseeing the work of 175 others.[32][41] As a result of his stay, Romney developed a lifelong affection for France and its people, and has remained fluent in French.[43]
At their first meeting following his return, Romney and Ann Davies reconnected and decided to get married.[44] Romney began attending Brigham Young University (BYU), where she had been studying.[45] The couple married on March 21, 1969, in a civil ceremony in Bloomfield Hills.[46][47] The following day, they flew to Utah for a Mormon wedding ceremony at the Salt Lake Temple (Ann had converted to the faith while he was away).[46][47]
At culturally conservative BYU, Romney remained isolated from much of the upheaval of that era.[32][45] He became president of the Cougar Club booster organization and showed a new-found discipline in his studies.[32][45] During his senior year, he took a leave to work as driver and advance man for his mother Lenore Romney’s eventually unsuccessful 1970 campaign for U.S. Senator from Michigan;[22][46] together, they visited all 83 Michigan counties.[51][52] He earned a Bachelor of Arts in English with highest honors in 1971,[45]giving commencement addresses to both the College of Humanities and to the whole of BYU.[nb 7]
The Romneys’ first son, Taggart, was born in 1970[34] while they were undergraduates at BYU and living in a basement apartment.[45] Ann subsequently gave birth to Matthew (1971) and Joshua (1975). Benjamin (1978) and Craig (1981) would arrive later, after Romney began his career.[34]
Mitt Romney wanted to pursue a business career, but his father advised him that a law degree would be valuable to his career even if he did not become a lawyer.[55][56] Thus, he enrolled in the recently created jointJuris Doctor/Master of Business Administration four-year program coordinated between Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School.[57]He readily adapted to the business school’s pragmatic, data-driven case study method of teaching.[56] Living in a Belmont, Massachusetts house with Ann and their two children, his social experience differed from most of his classmates’.[46][56] He was nonideological and did not involve himself in the political issues of the day.[46][56] He graduated in 1975 cum laude from the law school, in the top third of that class, and was named a Baker Scholar for graduating in the top five percent of his business school class.[53][57]
Recruited by several firms, Romney joined the Boston Consulting Group (BCG), reasoning that working as a management consultant for a variety of companies would better prepare him for a future position as a chief executive.[55][58][nb 8] Part of a 1970s wave of top graduates who chose to go into consulting rather than join a large company directly,[60] he found his legal and business education useful in his job.[55] He applied BCG principles such as the growth-share matrix,[61] and executives viewed him as having a bright future there.[55][62] At the Boston Consulting Group, he was a colleague of Benjamin Netanyahu, with whom he formed a thirty-year friendship.[63]
In 1977, he was hired by Bain & Company, a management consulting firm in Boston formed a few years earlier by Bill Bain and other ex-BCG employees.[55][61][64] Bain would later say of the thirty-year-old Romney, “He had the appearance [sic] of confidence of a guy who was maybe ten years older.”[65] Unlike other consulting firms, which issued recommendations and then departed, Bain & Company immersed itself in a client’s business and worked with them until changes were implemented.[55][61] Romney became a vice-president of the firm in 1978,[14] and worked with clients such as the Monsanto Company, Outboard Marine Corporation, Burlington Industries, and Corning Incorporated.[58] Within a few years, the firm considered him one of their best consultants and clients sometimes sought to use him over more senior partners.[55][66]
Minor political issues
Two family incidents during this time later came to light during Romney’s political campaigns.[67][68] A state park ranger in 1981 told Romney his motorboat had an insufficiently visible license number and he would face a $50 fine if he took the boat onto the lake. Disagreeing about the license and wanting to continue a family outing, Romney took it out anyway, saying he would pay the fine. The ranger arrested him for disorderly conduct. The charges were dropped several days later.[69] In 1983, on a twelve-hour family road trip, he placed the family’s dog in a windshield-equipped carrier on the roof of their car, and then washed the car and carrier after the dog suffered a bout of diarrhea.[46] The dog incident in particular later became fodder for Romney’s critics and political opponents.[68][70]
In 1984, Romney left Bain & Company to cofound the spin-off private equity investment firm, Bain Capital.[71] He had initially refrained from accepting Bill Bain’s offer to head the new venture, until Bain rearranged the terms in a complicated partnership structure so that there was no financial or professional risk to Romney.[55][65][72] Bain and Romney raised the $37 million in funds needed to start the new operation, which had seven employees.[58][73] Romney held the titles of president[74] and managing general partner.[75][76] The sole shareholder of the firm, publications also referred to him as managing director or CEO.[77][78][79]
Initially, Bain Capital focused on venture capital investments. Romney set up a system in which any partner could veto one of these potential opportunities, and he personally saw so many weaknesses that few venture capital investments were approved in the initial two years.[55] The firm’s first significant success was a 1986 investment to help start Staples Inc., after founder Thomas G. Stemberg convinced Romney of the market size for office supplies and Romney convinced others; Bain Capital eventually reaped a nearly sevenfold return on its investment, and Romney sat on the Staples board of directors for over a decade.[55][73][80]
Romney soon switched Bain Capital’s focus from startups to the relatively new business of leveraged buyouts: buying existing companies with money mostly borrowed from banking institutions using the newly bought companies’ assets as collateral, then taking steps to improve the companies’ value, and finally selling those companies once their value peaked, usually within a few years.[55][65] Bain Capital lost money in many of its early leveraged buyouts, but then found deals that made large returns.[55] The firm invested in or acquired Accuride Corporation, Brookstone, Domino’s Pizza, Sealy Corporation, Sports Authority, and Artisan Entertainment, as well as some lesser-known companies in the industrial and medical sectors.[55][65][81] Much of the firm’s profit was earned from a relatively small number of deals; Bain Capital’s overall success-to-failure ratio was about even.[nb 9]
Romney discovered few investment opportunities himself (and those that he did, often failed to make money for the firm).[83] Instead, he focused on analyzing the merits of possible deals that others brought forward and on recruiting investors to participate in them once approved.[83] Within Bain Capital, Romney spread profits from deals widely within the firm to keep people motivated, often keeping less than ten percent for himself.[84] Data-driven, Romney often played the role of a devil’s advocate during exhaustive analysis of whether to go forward with a deal.[55][80] He wanted to drop a Bain Capital hedge fund that initially lost money, but other partners disagreed with him and it eventually gained billions.[55] He opted out of the Artisan Entertainment deal, not wanting to profit from a studio that produced R-rated films.[55] Romney served on the board of directors of Damon Corporation, a medical testing company later found guilty of defrauding the government; Bain Capital tripled its investment before selling off the company, and the fraud was discovered by the new owners (Romney was never implicated).[55] In some cases, Romney had little involvement with a company once acquired.[73]
Bain Capital’s leveraged buyouts sometimes led to layoffs, either soon after acquisition or later after the firm had concluded its role.[61][72][73] Exactly how many jobs Bain Capital added compared to those lost because of these investments and buyouts is unknown, owing to a lack of records and Bain Capital’s penchant for privacy on behalf of itself and its investors.[85][86][87] Maximizing the value of acquired companies and the return to Bain’s investors, not job creation, was the firm’s fundamental goal.[73][88] Bain Capital’s acquisition of Ampad exemplified a deal where it profited handsomely from early payments and management fees, even though the subject company itself ended up going into bankruptcy.[55][80][88]Dade Behring was another case where Bain Capital received an eightfold return on its investment, but the company itself was saddled with debt and laid off over a thousand employees before Bain Capital exited (the company subsequently went into bankruptcy, with more layoffs, before recovering and prospering).[85] Referring to the layoffs that happened, Romney said in 2007: “Sometimes the medicine is a little bitter but it is necessary to save the life of the patient. My job was to try and make the enterprise successful, and in my view the best security a family can have is that the business they work for is strong.”[72]
In 1990, facing financial collapse, Bain & Company asked Romney to return.[71] Announced as its new CEO in January 1991,[75][76] he drew a symbolic salary of one dollar[71] (remaining managing general partner of Bain Capital during this time).[75][76] He oversaw an effort to restructure Bain & Company’s employee stock-ownership plan and real-estate deals, while rallying the firm’s one thousand employees, imposing a new governing structure that excluded Bain and the other founding partners from control, and increasing fiscal transparency.[55][58][71] He got Bain and other initial owners who had removed excessive amounts of money from the firm to return a substantial amount, and persuaded creditors, including the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, to accept less than full payment.[89] Within about a year, he had led Bain & Company through a turnaround and returned the firm to profitability.[58] He turned Bain & Company over to new leadership and returned to Bain Capital in December 1992.[55][90][91]
Romney took a leave of absence from Bain Capital from November 1993 to November 1994 to run for the U.S. Senate.[46][92] During that time, Ampad workers went on strike, and asked Romney to intervene. Against the advice of Bain Capital lawyers, Romney met the strikers, but told them he had no position of active authority in the matter.[93][94]
By 1999, Bain Capital was on its way towards becoming one of the foremost private equity firms in the nation,[72] having increased its number of partners from 5 to 18, with 115 employees overall, and $4 billion under its management.[65][73] The firm’s average annual internal rate of return on realized investments was 113 percent[58][95] and its average yearly return to investors was around 50–80 percent.[82]
Romney took a paid leave of absence from Bain Capital in February 1999 to serve as the president and CEO of the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympic Games Organizing Committee.[96][97] Billed in some public statements as keeping a part-time role,[96][98] Romney remained the firm’s sole shareholder, managing director, CEO, and president, signing corporate and legal documents, attending to his interests within the firm, and conducting prolonged negotiations for the terms of his departure.[96][99] He did not involve himself in day-to-day operations of the firm or investment decisions for Bain Capital’s new private equity funds.[96][99] He retained his position on several boards of directors during this time and regularly returned to Massachusetts to attend meetings.[100]
In August 2001, Romney announced that he would not return to Bain Capital.[101] His separation from the firm concluded in early 2002;[96] he transferred his ownership to other partners and negotiated an agreement that allowed him to receive a passive profit share as a retired partner in some Bain Capital entities, including buyout and investment funds.[84][1] The private equity business continued to thrive, earning him millions of dollars in annual income.[84]
Personal wealth
As a result of his business career, Romney and his wife have a net worth of between $190 and $250 million,[1][102] including their retirement account, worth between $20 and $100 million.[103] Most of that wealth has been held in blind trusts since 2003, some of it offshore.[1][104][105] An additional blind trust, valued at $100 million in 2012, exists in the name of their children.[106][107] In 2010, Romney and his wife received about $22 million in income, almost all of it from investments such as dividends, capital gains, and carried interest; and they paid about $3 million in federal income taxes, for an effective tax rate of 14 percent.[108] For the years 1990–2010, their effective federal tax rates were above 13 percent with an average rate of about 20 percent.[109]
Romney has tithed to the LDS Church regularly, and donated to LDS Church-owned BYU.[10][11][110] In 2010, for example, he and his wife gave $1.5 million to the church.[108] The Romney family’s Tyler Charitable Foundation gave out about $650,000 in that year, some of which went to organizations that fight diseases.[111] For the years 1990–2010, the Romneys’ total charitable donations as portions of their income averaged 14 percent.[109]
Local LDS Church leadership
During his business career, Romney held several positions in the local lay clergy. In 1977, he became a counselor to the president of the Boston Stake.[112] He served as bishop of the ward (ecclesiastical and administrative head of his congregation) at Belmont, Massachusetts, from 1981 to 1986.[113][114] As such, in addition to home teaching, he also formulated Sunday services and classes using LDS scriptures to guide the congregation.[115] After the destruction of the Belmont meetinghouse by a fire of suspicious origins in 1984, he forged links with other religious institutions, allowing the congregation to rotate its meetings to other houses of worship during the reconstruction of their building.[114][116]
From 1986 to 1994, Romney presided over the Boston Stake, which included more than a dozen wards in eastern Massachusetts with almost 4,000 church members altogether.[66][115][117] He organized a team to handle financial and management issues, sought to counter anti-Mormon sentiments, and tried to solve social problems among poor Southeast Asian converts.[114][116] An unpaid position, his local church leadership often took 30 or more hours a week of his time,[115] and he became known for his considerable energy in the role.[66] He earned a reputation for avoiding any overnight travel that might interfere with his church responsibilities.[115]
Romney took a hands-on role in general matters, helping in domestic maintenance efforts, visiting the sick, and counseling burdened church members.[113][114][115] A number of local church members later credited him with turning their lives around or helping them through difficult times.[114][115][116] Others, rankled by his leadership style, desired a more consensus-based approach.[114] Romney tried to balance the conservative directives from church leadership in Utah with the desire of some Massachusetts members to have a more flexible application of religious doctrine.[66] He agreed with some requests from the liberal women’s group that published Exponent II for changes in the way the church dealt with women, but clashed with women whom he felt were departing too much from doctrine.[66] In particular, he counseled women to not have abortions except in the rare cases allowed by LDS doctrine,[nb 10] and encouraged single women facing unplanned pregnancies to give up their baby for adoption.[66] Romney later said that the years spent as an LDS minister gave him direct exposure to people struggling financially and empathy for those with family problems.[118]
For much of his business career, Romney did not take public, political stances.[119][120] He had kept abreast of national politics since college,[32] though, and the circumstances of his father’s presidential campaign loss had irked him for decades.[22] He registered as an Independent[46] and voted in the 1992 presidential primaries for the Democratic former senator from Massachusetts, Paul Tsongas.[119][121]
By 1993, Romney had begun thinking about entering politics, partly based upon Ann’s urging and partly to follow in his father’s footsteps.[46] He decided to challenge incumbent Democratic U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy, who was seeking re-election for the sixth time. Political pundits viewed Kennedy as vulnerable that year – in part because of the unpopularity of the Democratic Congress as a whole, and in part because this was Kennedy’s first election since the William Kennedy Smith trial in Florida, in which the senator had suffered some negative public relations regarding his character.[122][123][124] Romney changed his affiliation to Republican in October 1993 and formally announced his candidacy in February 1994.[46] In addition to his leave from Bain Capital, he stepped down from his church leadership role in 1994.[115]
Radio personality Janet Jeghelian took an early lead in polls among candidates for the Republican nomination for the Senate seat, but Romney proved the most effective fundraiser.[125][126]He won 68 percent of the vote at the May 1994 Massachusetts Republican Party convention; businessman John Lakian finished a distant second, eliminating Jeghelian.[127] Romney defeated Lakian in the September 1994 primary with more than 80 percent of the vote.[14][128]
In the general election, Kennedy faced the first serious re-election challenger of his career.[122] The younger, telegenic, and well-funded Romney ran as a businessman who stated he had created ten thousand jobs and as a Washington outsider with a solid family image and moderate stances on social issues.[122][129] When Kennedy tried to tie Romney’s policies to those of Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, Romney responded, “Look, I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to take us back to Reagan-Bush.”[130] Romney stated, “Ultimately, this is a campaign about change.”[131]
Romney’s campaign was effective in portraying Kennedy as soft on crime, but had trouble establishing its own consistent positions.[132] By mid-September 1994, polls showed the race to be approximately even.[122][133][134] Kennedy responded with a series of ads that focused on Romney’s seemingly shifting political views on issues such as abortion;[135] Romney would respond on the latter by stating, “I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country.”[136] Other Kennedy ads centered on layoffs of workers at the Ampad plant owned by Romney’s Bain Capital.[122][137] The latter was effective in blunting Romney’s momentum.[80] Kennedy and Romney held a widely watched late-October debate that had no clear winner, but by then, Kennedy had pulled ahead in polls and stayed ahead afterward.[138] Romney spent $3 million of his own money in the race and more than $7 million overall.[139][nb 11] In the November general election, despite a disastrous showing for Democrats nationwide, Kennedy won the election with 58 percent of the vote to Romney’s 41 percent,[55] the smallest margin in any of Kennedy’s re-election campaigns for the Senate.[142]
The day after the election, Romney returned to Bain Capital, but the loss had a lasting effect; he told his brother, “I never want to run for something again unless I can win.”[46][143] When his father died in 1995, Mitt donated his inheritance to BYU’s George W. Romney Institute of Public Management.[54] He also joined the board, as vice-chair, of the Points of Light Foundation,[101] which had incorporated his father’s National Volunteer Center. Romney felt restless as the decade neared a close; the goal of simply making more money was becoming inadequate for him.[46][143] Although no longer in a local leadership position in his church, he still taught Sunday School.[113] During the long and controversial approval and construction process for the $30 million Mormon temple in Belmont, he feared that, as a political figure who had opposed Kennedy, he would become a focal point for opposition to the structure.[114] He thus kept to a limited, behind-the-scenes role in attempts to ease tensions between the church and local residents.[113][114][116]
In 1998, Ann Romney learned that she had multiple sclerosis; Mitt described watching her fail a series of neurological tests as the worst day of his life.[46] After experiencing two years of severe difficulties with the disease, she found – while living in Park City, Utah, where the couple had built a vacation home – a combination of mainstream, alternative, and equestrian therapies that enabled her to lead a lifestyle mostly without limitations.[144] When her husband received a job offer to take over the troubled organization responsible for the 2002 Winter Olympics and Paralympics, to be held in Salt Lake City in Utah, she urged him to accept it; eager for a new challenge, as well as another chance to prove himself in public life, he did.[143][145][146] On February 11, 1999, the Salt Lake Organizing Committee for the Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games of 2002 hired Romney as their president and CEO.[147]
Before Romney took the position, the event was running $379 million short of its revenue goals.[147] Officials had made plans to scale back the Games to compensate for the fiscal crisis, and there were fears it might be moved away entirely.[148] Additionally, the image of the Games had been damaged by allegations of bribery against top officials including prior committee president and CEO Frank Joklik. The Salt Lake Organizing Committee forced Joklik and committee vice president Dave Johnson to resign.[149] Utah power brokers, including Governor Mike Leavitt, searched for someone with a scandal-free reputation to take charge of the Olympics, and chose Romney based on his business and legal expertise as well as his connections to both the LDS Church and the state.[146][150] The appointment faced some initial criticism from non-Mormons, and fears from Mormons, that it represented cronyism or made the Games seem too Mormon-dominated.[38] Romney donated to charity the $1.4 million in salary and severance payments he received for his three years as president and CEO, and also contributed $1 million to the Olympics.[151]
Romney restructured the organization’s leadership and policies. He reduced budgets and boosted fundraising, alleviating the concerns of corporate sponsors while recruiting new ones.[143][146] Romney worked to ensure the safety of the Games following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks by coordinating a $300 million security budget.[145] He oversaw a $1.32 billion total budget, 700 employees, and 26,000 volunteers.[147] The federal government provided approximately $400 million[146][152][153] to $600 million[154][155]of that budget, much of it a result of Romney’s having aggressively lobbied Congress and federal agencies.[155][156] It was a record level of federal funding for the staging of a U.S. Olympics.[153][156] An additional $1.1 billion of indirect federal funding came to the state in the form of highway and transit projects.[157]
Romney emerged as the local public face of the Olympic effort, appearing in photographs, in news stories, on collectible Olympics pins depicting Romney wrapped by an American flag, and on buttons carrying phrases like “Hey, Mitt, we love you!”[143][146][158]Robert H. Garff, the chair of the organizing committee, later said “It was obvious that he had an agenda larger than just the Olympics,”[143] and that Romney wanted to use the Olympics to propel himself into the national spotlight and a political career.[146][159] Garff believed the initial budget situation was not as bad as Romney portrayed, given there were still three years to reorganize.[146] Utah Senator Bob Bennett said that much of the needed federal money was already in place.[146] An analysis by The Boston Globe later stated that the committee had nearly $1 billion in committed revenues at that time.[146]Olympics critic Steve Pace, who led Utahns for Responsible Public Spending, thought Romney exaggerated the initial fiscal state to lay the groundwork for a well-publicized rescue.[159] Kenneth Bullock, another board member of the organizing committee and also head of the Utah League of Cities and Towns, often clashed with Romney at the time, and later said that Romney deserved some credit for the turnaround but not as much as he claimed.[143] Bullock said: “He tried very hard to build an image of himself as a savior, the great white hope. He was very good at characterizing and castigating people and putting himself on a pedestal.”[146]
Despite the initial fiscal shortfall, the Games ended up with a surplus of $100 million.[160] President George W. Bush praised Romney’s efforts and 87 percent of Utahns approved of his performance as Olympics head.[23][161] It solidified his reputation as a “turnaround artist”,[146][162][163] and Harvard Business School taught a case study based around his actions.[61]U.S. Olympic Committee head William Hybl credited Romney with an extraordinary effort in overcoming a difficult time for the Olympics, culminating in “the greatest Winter Games I have ever seen”.[146] Romney wrote a book about his experience titled Turnaround: Crisis, Leadership, and the Olympic Games, published in 2004. The role gave Romney experience in dealing with federal, state, and local entities, a public persona he had previously lacked, and the chance to relaunch his political aspirations.[143]
In 2002, plagued by political missteps and personal scandals, the administration of Republican Acting Governor of MassachusettsJane Swift appeared vulnerable, and many Republicans viewed her as unable to win a general election.[161][164] Prominent party figures – as well as the White House – wanted Romney to run for governor[165][166] and the opportunity appealed to him for reasons including its national visibility.[167] A poll by the Boston Herald showed Republicans favoring Romney over Swift by more than 50 percentage points.[168] On March 19, 2002, Swift announced she would not seek her party’s nomination, and hours later Romney declared his candidacy,[168] for which he would face no opposition in the primary.[169] In June 2002, the Massachusetts Democratic Party challenged Romney’s eligibility to run for governor, noting that state law required seven years’ consecutive residence and that Romney had filed his state tax returns as a Utah resident in 1999 and 2000.[170][171] In response, the bipartisan Massachusetts State Ballot Law Commission unanimously ruled that he had maintained sufficient financial and personal ties to Massachusetts and was, therefore, an eligible candidate.[172]
Romney again ran as a political outsider.[161] He played down his party affiliation,[173] saying he was “not a partisan Republican” but rather a “moderate” with “progressive” views.[174] He stated that he would observe a moratorium on changes to the state’s laws on abortion, but reiterated that he would “preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose” and that his position was “unequivocal”.[136][175] He touted his private sector experience as qualifying him for addressing the state’s fiscal problems[169] and stressed his ability to obtain federal funds for the state, offering his Olympics record as evidence.[153][156] He proposed to reorganize the state government while eliminating waste, fraud, and mismanagement.[173][176] The campaign innovatively utilized microtargeting techniques, identifying like-minded groups of voters and reaching them with narrowly tailored messaging.[177]
In an attempt to overcome the image that had damaged him in the 1994 Senate race – that of a wealthy corporate buyout specialist out of touch with the needs of regular people – the campaign staged a series of “work days”, in which Romney performed blue-collar jobs such as herding cows and baling hay, unloading a fishing boat, and hauling garbage.[176][178][179] Television ads highlighting the effort, as well as one portraying his family in gushing terms and showing him shirtless,[178] received a poor public response and were a factor in his Democratic opponent, Massachusetts State TreasurerShannon O’Brien, leading in the polls as late as mid-October.[176][179] He responded with ads that accused O’Brien of being a failed watchdog for state pension fund losses in the stock market and that associated her husband, a former lobbyist, with the Enron scandal.[173][179] These were effective in capturing independent voters.[179] O’Brien said that Romney’s budget plans were unrealistic; the two also differed on capital punishment and bilingual education, with Romney supporting the former and opposing the latter.[180]
During the election, Romney contributed more than $6 million – a state record at the time – to the nearly $10 million raised for his campaign overall.[181][182] On November 5, 2002, he won the governorship, earning 50 percent of the vote to O’Brien’s 45 percent.[183]
The swearing in of Romney as the 70th governor of Massachusetts took place on January 2, 2003.[184] He faced a Massachusetts state legislature with large Democratic majorities in both houses, and had picked his cabinet and advisors based more on managerial abilities than partisan affiliation.[185][186] He declined a governor’s salary of $135,000 during his term.[187] Upon entering office in the middle of a fiscal year, he faced an immediate $650 million shortfall and a projected $3 billion deficit for the next year.[173] Unexpected revenue of $1.0–1.3 billion from a previously enacted capital gains tax increase and $500 million in new federal grants decreased the deficit to $1.2–1.5 billion.[188][189] Through a combination of spending cuts, increased fees, and removal of corporate tax loopholes,[188] the state achieved surpluses of around $600–700 million during Romney’s last two full fiscal years in office, although it began running deficits again after that.[nb 12]
Romney supported raising various fees, including those for drivers’ licenses and gun licenses, to raise more than $300 million.[173][188] He increased a special gasoline retailer fee by two cents per gallon, generating about $60 million per year in additional revenue.[173][188] Opponents said the reliance on fees sometimes imposed a hardship on those who could least afford them.[188] Romney also closed tax loopholes that brought in another $181 million from businesses over the next two years and over $300 million for his term.[173][194][195] He did so in the face of conservative and corporate critics who viewed these actions as tax increases.[194][195]
The state legislature, with the governor’s support, cut spending by $1.6 billion, including $700 million in reductions in state aid to cities and towns.[196] The cuts also included a $140 million reduction in state funding for higher education, which led state-run colleges and universities to increase fees by 63 percent over four years.[173][188] Romney sought additional cuts in his last year as governor by vetoing nearly 250 items in the state budget; a heavily Democratic legislature overrode all the vetoes.[197]
The cuts in state spending put added pressure on localities to reduce services or raise property taxes, and the share of town and city revenues coming from property taxes rose from 49 to 53 percent.[173][188] The combined state and local tax burden in Massachusetts increased during Romney’s governorship.[173] He did propose a reduction in the state income tax rate that the legislature rejected.[198]
Romney sought to bring near-universal health insurance coverage to the state. This came after Staples founder Stemberg told him at the start of his term that doing so would be the best way he could help people.[199] Another factor was that the federal government, owing to the rules of Medicaid funding, threatened to cut $385 million in those payments to Massachusetts if the state did not reduce the number of uninsured recipients of health care services.[175][200] Although the idea of universal health insurance had not come to the fore during the campaign, Romney decided that because people without insurance still received expensive health care, the money spent by the state for such care could be better used to subsidize insurance for the poor.[199]
Determined that a new Massachusetts health insurance measure not raise taxes or resemble the previous decade’s failed “Hillarycare” proposal at the federal level, Romney formed a team of consultants from diverse political backgrounds to apply those principles. Beginning in late 2004, they devised a set of proposals that were more ambitious than an incremental one from the Massachusetts Senate and more acceptable to him than one from the Massachusetts House of Representatives that incorporated a new payroll tax.[175][186][200] In particular, Romney pushed for incorporating an individual mandate at the state level.[20] Past rival Ted Kennedy, who had made universal health coverage his life’s work and who, over time, had developed a warm relationship with Romney,[201] gave the plan a positive reception, which encouraged Democratic legislators to cooperate.[175][200] The effort eventually gained the support of all major stakeholders within the state, and Romney helped break a logjam between rival Democratic leaders in the legislature.[175][200]
On April 12, 2006, the governor signed the resulting Massachusetts health reform law, commonly called “Romneycare”, which requires nearly all Massachusetts residents to buy health insurance coverage or face escalating tax penalties, such as the loss of their personal income tax exemption.[202] The bill also established means-tested state subsidies for people who lacked adequate employer insurance and whose income was below a threshold, using funds that had covered the health costs of the uninsured.[203][204] He vetoed eight sections of the health care legislation, including a controversial $295-per-employee assessment on businesses that do not offer health insurance and provisions guaranteeing dental benefits to Medicaid recipients.[202][205] The legislature overrode all eight vetoes, but the governor’s office said the differences were not essential.[205] The law was the first of its kind in the nation and became the signature achievement of Romney’s term in office.[175][nb 13]
At the beginning of his governorship, Romney opposed same-sex marriage and civil unions, but advocated tolerance and supported some domestic partnership benefits.[175][207][208] A November 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision required the state to recognize same-sex marriages (Goodridge v. Department of Public Health).[209] Romney reluctantly backed a state constitutional amendment in February 2004 that would have banned those marriages but still allowed civil unions, viewing it as the only feasible way to accomplish the former.[209] In May 2004, in compliance with the court decision, the governor instructed town clerks to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. However, citing a 1913 law that barred out-of-state residents from getting married in Massachusetts if their union would be illegal in their home state, he said no marriage licenses were to be issued to those people not planning to move to Massachusetts.[207][210] In June 2005, Romney abandoned his support for the compromise amendment, stating that it confused voters who opposed both same-sex marriage and civil unions.[207] Instead, he endorsed a ballot initiative led by the Coalition for Marriage and Family (an alliance of socially conservative organizations) that would have banned same-sex marriage and made no provisions for civil unions.[207] In 2004 and 2006, he urged the U.S. Senate to vote in favor of the Federal Marriage Amendment.[211][212]
In 2005, Romney revealed a change of view regarding abortion, moving from the pro-choice positions expressed during his 1994 and 2002 campaigns to a pro-life one in opposition to Roe v. Wade.[175] Romney attributed his conversion to an interaction with Harvard University biologist Douglas Melton, an expert on embryonic stem cell biology, although Melton vehemently disputed Romney’s recollection of their conversation.[213] Romney subsequently vetoed a bill on pro-life grounds that expanded access to emergency contraception in hospitals and pharmacies (the legislature overrode the veto).[214] He also amended his position on embryonic stem cell research itself.[nb 14]
Romney used a bully pulpit approach towards promoting his agenda, staging well-organized media events to appeal directly to the public rather than pushing his proposals in behind-doors sessions with the state legislature.[175] He dealt with a public crisis of confidence in Boston’s Big Dig project – that followed a fatal ceiling collapse in 2006 – by wresting control of the project from the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority.[175]After two years of negotiating the state’s participation in the landmark Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative that instituted a cap-and-trade arrangement for power plant emissions in the Northeast, Romney pulled Massachusetts out of the initiative shortly before its signing in December 2005, citing a lack of cost limits for industry.[215]
During 2004, Romney spent considerable effort trying to bolster the state Republican Party, but it failed to gain any seats in the state legislative elections that year.[173][216] Given a prime-time appearance at the 2004 Republican National Convention, political figures began discussing him as a potential 2008 presidential candidate.[217] Midway through his term, Romney decided that he wanted to stage a full-time run for president,[218] and on December 14, 2005, announced that he would not seek re-election for a second term.[219] As chair of the Republican Governors Association, Romney traveled around the country, meeting prominent Republicans and building a national political network;[218] he spent all, or parts of, more than 200 days out of state during 2006, preparing for his run.[220]
The Governor had a 61 percent job approval rating in public polls after his initial fiscal actions in 2003, although his approval rating subsequently declined,[221] driven in part by his frequent out-of-state travel.[221][222]Romney’s approval rating stood at 34 percent in November 2006, ranking 48th of the 50 U.S. governors.[223] Dissatisfaction with Romney’s administration and the weak condition of the Republican state party were among several factors contributing to Democrat Deval Patrick‘s 20-point win over Republican Kerry Healey, Romney’s lieutenant governor, in the 2006 Massachusetts gubernatorial election.[222][224]
Romney filed to register a presidential campaign committee with the Federal Election Commission on his penultimate day in office as governor. His term ended January 4, 2007.[225]
Romney formally announced his candidacy for the 2008 Republican nomination for president on February 13, 2007, in Dearborn, Michigan.[226] Again casting himself as a political outsider,[227] his speech frequently invoked his father and his family, and stressed experiences in the private, public, and voluntary sectors that had brought him to this point.[226][228]
Holding an “Ask Mitt Anything” session in Ames, Iowa, in May 2007
The campaign emphasized Romney’s highly profitable career in the business world and his stewardship of the Olympics.[218][229][nb 15] He also had political experience as a governor, together with a political pedigree courtesy of his father (as well as many biographical parallels with him).[nb 16] Ann Romney, who had become an advocate for those with multiple sclerosis,[235] was in remission and would be an active participant in his campaign,[236] helping to soften his political personality.[237] Media stories referred to the 6-foot-2-inch (1.88 m) Romney as handsome.[238] Moreover, a number of commentators noted that with his square jaw and ample hair graying at the temples, he physically matched one of the common images of what a president should look like.[71][239][240][241]
Romney’s liabilities included having run for senator and serving as governor in one of the nation’s most liberal states and having taken positions in opposition to the party’s conservative base during that time.[218][229][236] Late during his term as governor, he had shifted positions and emphases to better align with traditional conservatives on social issues.[218][229][236] Skeptics, including some Republicans, charged Romney with opportunism and a lack of core principles.[121][175][242] As a Mormon, he faced suspicion and skepticism by some in the Evangelical portion of the party.[242]
For his campaign, Romney assembled a veteran group of Republican staffers, consultants, and pollsters.[229][243] He was little-known nationally, though, and stayed around the 10 percent support range in Republican preference polls for the first half of 2007.[218] He proved the most effective fundraiser of any of the Republican candidates and also partly financed his campaign with his own personal fortune.[229][244] These resources, combined with the mid-year near-collapse of nominal front-runner John McCain‘s campaign, made Romney a threat to win the nomination and the focus of the other candidates’ attacks.[245] Romney’s staff suffered from internal strife; the candidate himself was at times indecisive, often asking for more data before making a decision.[229][246]
During all of his political campaigns, Romney has avoided speaking publicly about Mormon doctrines, referring to the U.S. Constitution’s prohibition of religious tests for public office.[247] But persistent questions about the role of religion in Romney’s life, as well as Southern Baptist minister and former Governor of ArkansasMike Huckabee‘s rise in the polls based upon an explicitly Christian-themed campaign, led to the December 6, 2007, “Faith in America” speech.[248] In the speech Romney declared, “I believe in my Mormon faith and endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers. I will be true to them and to my beliefs.”[11] Romney added that he should neither be elected nor rejected based upon his religion,[249] and echoed Senator John F. Kennedy‘s famous speech during his 1960 presidential campaign in saying, “I will put no doctrine of any church above the plain duties of the office and the sovereign authority of the law.”[248] Instead of discussing the specific tenets of his faith, he said he would be informed by it, stating: “Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone.”[248][249] Academics would later study the role religion had played in the campaign.[nb 17]
The campaign’s strategy called for winning the initial two contests – the January 3, 2008, Iowa Republican caucuses and the adjacent-to-his-home-state January 8 New Hampshire primary – and propelling Romney nationally.[252] However, he took second place in both, losing Iowa to a vastly outspent Huckabee who received more than twice the evangelical Christian votes,[253][254] and losing New Hampshire to the resurgent McCain.[253] Huckabee and McCain criticized Romney’s image as a flip flopper[253]and this label would stick to Romney through the campaign[229] (one that Romney rejected as unfair and inaccurate, except for his acknowledged change of mind on abortion).[237][255] Romney seemed to approach the campaign as a management consulting exercise, and showed a lack of personal warmth and political feel; journalist Evan Thomas wrote that Romney “came off as a phony, even when he was perfectly sincere.”[237][256] The fervor with which Romney adopted his new stances and attitudes contributed to the perception of inauthenticity that hampered the campaign.[61][257] Romney’s staff would conclude that competing as a candidate of social conservatism and ideological purity rather than of pragmatic competence had been a mistake.[237]
A win by McCain over Huckabee in South Carolina, and by Romney over McCain in childhood-home Michigan, set up a pivotal battle in the Florida primary.[258][259] Romney campaigned intensively on economic issues and the burgeoning subprime mortgage crisis, while McCain attacked Romney regarding Iraq policy and benefited from endorsements from Florida officeholders.[258][259] McCain won a 5 percentage point victory on January 29.[258][259] Although many Republican officials were now lining up behind McCain,[259] Romney persisted through the nationwide Super Tuesday contests on February 5. There he won primaries or caucuses in several states, but McCain won in more and in larger-population ones.[260] Trailing McCain in delegates by a more than two-to-one margin, Romney announced the end of his campaign on February 7.[260]
Altogether, Romney had won 11 primaries and caucuses,[261] receiving about 4.7 million votes[262] and garnering about 280 delegates.[263] He spent $110 million during the campaign, including $45 million of his own money.[264]
Romney endorsed McCain for president a week later,[263] and McCain had Romney on a short list for vice presidential running mate, where his business experience would have balanced one of McCain’s weaknesses.[265] McCain, behind in the polls, opted instead for a high-risk, high-reward “game changer”, selecting Alaska GovernorSarah Palin.[266] McCain lost the election to Democratic Senator Barack Obama.
Activity between presidential campaigns
Romney supported the Bush administration’s Troubled Asset Relief Program in response to the late-2000s financial crisis, later saying that it prevented the U.S. financial system from collapsing.[267][268] During the U.S. automotive industry crisis of 2008–10, he opposed a bailout of the industry in the form of direct government intervention, and argued that a managed bankruptcy of struggling automobile companies should instead be accompanied by federal guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing from the private sector.[269]
Following the 2008 election, Romney laid the groundwork for a likely 2012 presidential campaign by using his Free and Strong America political action committee (PAC) to raise money for other Republican candidates and pay his existing political staff’s salaries and consulting fees.[270][271] A network of former staff and supporters around the nation were eager for him to run again.[272] He continued to give speeches and raise funds for Republicans,[273] but fearing overexposure, turned down many potential media appearances.[255] He also spoke before business, educational, and motivational groups.[274] From 2009 to 2011, he served on the board of directors of Marriott International, founded by his namesake J. Willard Marriott.[275] He had previously served on it from 1993 to 2002.[275][nb 18]
In 2009, the Romneys sold their primary residence in Belmont and their ski chalet in Utah, leaving them an estate along Lake Winnipesaukee in Wolfeboro, New Hampshire, and an oceanfront home in the La Jolladistrict of San Diego, California, which they had purchased the year before.[255][278][279] The La Jolla home proved beneficial in location and climate for Ann Romney’s multiple sclerosis therapies and for recovering from her late 2008 diagnosis of mammary ductal carcinomain situ and subsequent lumpectomy.[278][280][281] Both it and the New Hampshire location were near some of their grandchildren.[278] Romney maintained his voting registration in Massachusetts, however, and bought a smaller condominium in Belmont during 2010.[280][282] In February 2010, Romney had a minor altercation with LMFAO member Skyler Gordy, known as Sky Blu, on an airplane flight.[nb 19]
Immediately following the March 2010 passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Romney attacked the landmark legislation as “an unconscionable abuse of power” and said the act should be repealed.[290] The antipathy Republicans felt for it created a potential problem for the former governor, since the new federal law was in many ways similar to the Massachusetts health care reform passed during Romney’s term; as one Associated Press article stated, “Obamacare … looks a lot like Romneycare.”[290] While acknowledging that his plan was an imperfect work in progress, Romney did not back away from it. He defended the state-level health insurance mandate that underpinned it, calling the bill the right answer to Massachusetts’ problems at the time.[290][291][292]
In nationwide opinion polling for the 2012 Republican Presidential primaries, Romney led or placed in the top three with Palin and Huckabee. A January 2010 National Journal survey of political insiders found that a majority of Republican insiders and a plurality of Democratic insiders predicted Romney would be the party’s 2012 nominee.[293] Romney campaigned heavily for Republican candidates in the 2010 midterm elections,[294] raising more money than the other prospective 2012 Republican presidential candidates.[295] Beginning in early 2011, Romney presented a more relaxed visual image, including more casual attire.[257][296]
Romney making an appearance in Livonia, Michigan, days after his June 2011 formal campaign announcement
On April 11, 2011, Romney announced, via a video taped outdoors at the University of New Hampshire, that he had formed an exploratory committee for a run for the Republican presidential nomination.[297][298]Quinnipiac University political science professor Scott McLean stated, “We all knew that he was going to run. He’s really been running for president ever since the day after the 2008 election.”[298]
Romney stood to benefit from the Republican electorate’s tendency to nominate candidates who had previously run for president, and thus appeared to be next in line to be chosen.[272][299][300] The early stages of the race found him as the apparent front-runner in a weak field, especially in terms of fundraising prowess and organization.[301][302][303] Perhaps his greatest hurdle in gaining the Republican nomination was party opposition to the Massachusetts health care reform law that he had shepherded five years earlier.[296][298][300] As many potential Republican candidates with star power and fundraising ability decided not to run (including Mike Pence, John Thune, Haley Barbour, Mike Huckabee, and Mitch Daniels), Republican party figures searched for plausible alternatives to Romney.[301][303]
On June 2, 2011, Romney formally announced the start of his campaign. Speaking on a farm in Stratham, New Hampshire, he focused on the economy and criticized President Obama’s handling of it.[304] He said, “In the campaign to come, the American ideals of economic freedom and opportunity need a clear and unapologetic defense, and I intend to make it – because I have lived it.”[300]
Romney raised $56 million during 2011, more than double the amount raised by any of his Republican opponents,[305] and refrained from spending his own money on the campaign.[306] He initially pursued a low-key, low-profile strategy.[307]Michele Bachmann staged a brief surge in polls, which preceded a poll surge in September 2011 by Rick Perry who had entered the race the month before.[308] Perry and Romney exchanged sharp criticisms of each other during a series of debates among the Republican candidates.[309] The October 2011 decisions of Chris Christie and Sarah Palin not to run effectively settled the field of candidates.[310][311] Perry faded after poor performances in those debates, while Herman Cain‘s ‘long-shot’ bid gained popularity until allegations of sexual misconduct derailed it.[312][313]
Romney continued to seek support from a wary Republican electorate; at this point in the race, his poll numbers were relatively flat and at a historically low level for a Republican frontrunner.[310][314][315] After the charges of flip-flopping that marked his 2008 campaign began to accumulate again, Romney declared in November 2011: “I’ve been as consistent as human beings can be.”[316][317][318] In the final month before voting began, Newt Gingrich experienced a significant surge – taking a solid lead in national polls and most of the early caucus and primary states[319] – before settling back into parity or worse with Romney following a barrage of negative ads from Restore Our Future, a pro-Romney Super PAC.[320]
In the initial contest, the 2012 Iowa caucuses of January 3, election officials announced Romney as ahead with 25 percent of the vote, edging out a late-gaining Rick Santorum by eight votes (an also-strong Ron Paul finished third).[321] Sixteen days later, however, they certified Santorum as the winner by a 34-vote margin.[322] A week after the Iowa caucuses, Romney earned a decisive win in the New Hampshire primary with a total of 39 percent of the vote; Paul finished second and Jon Huntsman, Jr. third.[323]
In the run-up to the South Carolina Republican primary, Gingrich launched ads criticizing Romney for causing job losses while at Bain Capital, Perry referred to Romney’s role there as “vulture capitalism“, and Sarah Palin pressed Romney to prove his claim that he created 100,000 jobs during that time.[324][325] Many conservatives rallied in defense of Romney, rejecting what they inferred as criticism of free-market capitalism.[324]During two debates in the state, Romney fumbled questions about releasing his income tax returns, while Gingrich gained support with audience-rousing attacks on the debate moderators.[326][327] Romney’s double-digit lead in state polls evaporated; he lost to Gingrich by 13 points in the January 21 primary.[326] Combined with the delayed loss in Iowa, Romney’s admitted poor week represented a lost chance to end the race early, and he quickly decided to release two years of his tax returns.[326][328] The race turned to the Florida Republican primary, where in debates, appearances, and advertisements, Romney launched a sustained barrage against Gingrich’s past record and associations and current electability.[329][330] Romney enjoyed a large spending advantage from both his campaign and his aligned Super PAC, and after a record-breaking rate of negative ads from both sides, Romney won Florida on January 31, gaining 46 percent of the vote to Gingrich’s 32 percent.[331]
With running mate Paul Ryan in Norfolk, Virginia, during the vice presidential selection announcement on August 11, 2012
Several caucuses and primaries took place during February, and Santorum won three in a single night early in the month, propelling him into the lead in national and some state polls and positioning him as Romney’s chief rival.[332] Days later, Romney told the Conservative Political Action Conference that he had been a “severely conservative governor”[333] (while during his term in 2005 he had maintained that his positions were moderate and characterized reports that he was shifting to the right to attract conservative votes a media distortion).[334] Romney won the other five February contests, including a closely fought one in his home state of Michigan at the end of the month.[335][336] In the Super Tuesday primaries and caucuses of March 6, Romney won six of ten contests, including a narrow victory in Ohio over a vastly outspent Santorum. Although his victories were not enough to end the race, they were enough to establish a two-to-one delegate lead over Santorum.[337] Romney maintained his delegate margin through subsequent contests,[338] and Santorum suspended his campaign on April 10.[339] Following a sweep of five more contests on April 24, the Republican National Committee put its resources to work for Romney as the party’s presumptive nominee.[340] Romney clinched a majority of the delegates with a win in the Texas primary on May 29.
Polls consistently indicated a tight race for the November general election.[341] Negative ads from both sides dominated the campaign, with Obama’s proclaiming that Romney shipped jobs overseas while at Bain Capital and kept money in offshore tax havens and Swiss bank accounts.[342] A related issue dealt with Romney’s purported responsibility for actions at Bain Capital after taking the Olympics post.[97][99] Romney faced demands from Democrats to release additional years of his tax returns, an action a number of Republicans also felt would be wise; after being adamant that he would not do that, he released summaries of them in late September.[109][343] During May and June, the Obama campaign spent heavily and was able to paint a negative image of Romney in voters’ minds before the Romney campaign could construct a positive one.[344]
In July 2012, Romney visited the United Kingdom, Israel, and Poland, meeting leaders in an effort to raise his credibility as a world statesman.[345] Comments Romney made about the readiness of the 2012 Summer Olympics were perceived as undiplomatic by the British press.[346][347] Israeli Prime Minister (and former BCG colleague) Benjamin Netanyahu, embraced Romney, though some Palestinians criticized him for suggesting that Israel’s culture led to their greater economic success.[348]
On August 11, 2012, the Romney campaign announced the selection of Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin as his vice-presidential running mate.[349]
In mid-September, a video surfaced of Romney speaking before a group of supporters in which he stated that 47 percent of the nation pays no income tax, are dependent on the federal government, see themselves as victims, and will support President Obama unconditionally. Romney went on to say: “And so my job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”[352][353][354] After facing criticism about the tone and accuracy of these comments, he at first characterized them as “inelegantly stated”, then a couple of weeks later commented: “I said something that’s just completely wrong.”[355] Exit polls published following the election showed that voters never saw Romney as someone who cared about people like them.[344]
County-by-county results of the election, shaded by percentage won: Obama in blue, Romney in red
The first of three 2012 presidential election debates took place on October 3, in Denver. Media figures and political analysts widely viewed Romney as having delivered a stronger and more focused presentation than did President Obama.[355][356] That initial debate overshadowed Obama’s improved presentation in the last two debates later in October, and Romney maintained a small advantage in the debates when seen as a whole.[357]
The election took place on November 6, and Obama was projected the winner at about 11:14 pm Eastern Standard Time.[358] Romney garnered 206 electoral college votesto Obama’s 332, losing all but one of nine battleground states, and 47 percent of the nationwide popular vote to Obama’s 51 percent.[359][360] Media accounts described Romney as “shellshocked” by the result.[361] He and his senior campaign staff had disbelieved public polls showing Obama narrowly ahead, and had thought they were going to win until the vote tallies began to be reported on the evening of the election.[361] But Romney’s get out the vote operation had been inferior to Obama’s, both in person-to-person organization and in voter modeling and outreach technology[362] (the latter exemplified by the failure of the Project Orca application).[344] In his concession speech to his supporters, he said, “Like so many of you, Paul and I have left everything on the field. We have given our all to this campaign. I so wish that I had been able to fulfill your hopes to lead this country in a different direction, but the nation chose another leader.”[363] Reflecting on his defeat during a conference call to hundreds of fundraisers and donors a week after the election, Romney attributed the outcome to Obama’s having secured the votes of specific interest groups, including African Americans, Hispanic Americans, young people, and women, by offering them what Romney called “extraordinary financial gifts.”[364][365][366] The remark drew heavy criticism from prominent members of the Republican party.[367][368]
Romney meeting with President Obama after the 2012 presidential election.
In addition to calling for cuts in federal government spending to help reduce the national debt,[369] Romney proposed measures intended to limit the growth of entitlement programs, such as introducing means testing and gradually raising the eligibility ages for receipt of Social Security and Medicare.[369] He supported substantial increases in military spending and promised to invest more heavily in military weapons programs while increasing the number of active-duty military personnel.[370][371] He was very supportive of the directions taken by the budget proposals of Paul Ryan, although he later proposed his own budget plan.[372][373]
He also promised to seek income tax law changes that he said would help to lower federal deficits and would stimulate economic growth. These included: reducing individual income tax rates across the board by 20 percent, maintaining the Bush administration-era tax rate of 15 percent on investment income from dividends and capital gains (and eliminating this tax entirely for those with annual incomes less than $200,000), cutting the top tax rate on corporations from 35 to 25 percent, and eliminating the estate tax and the Alternative Minimum Tax.[377][378] He promised that the loss of government revenue from these tax cuts would be offset by closing loopholes and placing limits on tax deductions and credits available to taxpayers with the highest incomes,[378] but said that that aspect of the plan could not yet be evaluated because details would have to be worked out with Congress.[379]
Romney labeled Russia as America’s “number one geopolitical foe”,[383] and asserted that preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear capability should be America’s “highest national security priority”.[384] Romney stated his strong support for Israel.[385] He planned to formally label China a currency manipulator and take associated counteractions unless that country changed its trade practices.[386] Romney supported the Patriot Act,[387] the continued operation of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, and use of enhanced interrogation techniques against suspected terrorists.[387] Romney opposed same-sex marriage and civil unions, although he favored domestic partnership legislation that gives certain legal rights to same-sex couples, such as hospital visitation.[388] In 2011, he signed a pledge promising to seek passage of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.[389]
Since 2005, Romney described himself as “pro-life”.[390] In that year, he wrote: “I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother.”[391][nb 10][nb 14] During his 1994 campaign for the senate, Romney had said, “I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country,” a stance he reiterated during his 2002 campaign for governor.[136][394] While Romney would prefer to see passage of a constitutional amendment that would outlaw abortion, he did not believe the public would support such an amendment;[395] as an alternative, he promised to nominate Supreme Court justices who would help overturn Roe v. Wade, allowing each state to decide on the legality of abortion.[396]
During the first year following the election defeat, Romney generally kept a low profile,[400] with his ordinary daily activities around San Diego being captured via social media glimpses.[401] In December 2012, he joined the board of Marriott International for a third stint as a director.[402] In March 2013, Romney gave a reflective interview on Fox News Sunday, stating, “It kills me not to be there, not to be in the White House doing what needs to be done”. He again expressed regret at the “47 percent” remark, saying “There’s no question that hurt and did real damage to my campaign.”[403][404] (He was still echoing both of these sentiments a year later.[405]) Romney began working as executive partner group chairman for Solamere Capital, a private capital firm in Boston owned by his son Tagg.[406] He was also involved in supporting several charitable causes.[406]
Mitt and Ann Romney share a moment with his former running mate, Paul Ryan, as they witness the election and ascension of Ryan as the 54th Speaker of the House of Representatives on October 29, 2015
The Romneys bought a home again in the Deer Valley area of Park City, Utah,[407][408] followed by a property in Holladay, Utah, where they plan to tear down an existing house and build a new one.[406] They also gained long-sought permission to replace their La Jolla home with a much bigger one, including a car elevator that had brought some derision during the 2012 campaign.[406][409] In addition, Romney and his siblings continue to own a cottage in the gated community called Beach O’ Pines located south of Grand Bend, Ontario, which has been in the family for more than sixty years.[410] With the new acquisitions the couple briefly had five homes, located near each of their five sons and respective families, and the couple continued to spend considerable time with their grandchildren, who by 2013 numbered 22.[406][409] They then sold the condominium in Belmont and decided to make their main residence in Utah,[405] including switching voter registration.[408] The 2014 documentary film Mitt showed a behind-the-scenes, family-based perspective on both of Romney’s presidential campaigns and received positive notices for humanizing the candidate and illustrating the toll that campaigning takes.[405][411][412]
Romney himself thought he might be branded a “loser for life” and fade into an obscurity like Michael Dukakis[405] (a similar figure with no obvious base of political support who had lost what his party considered a winnable presidential election)[413] but, to the surprise of many political observers, that did not happen.[414] Romney re-emerged onto the political scene in the run-up to the 2014 U.S. midterm elections, endorsing, campaigning, and fundraising for a number of Republican candidates, especially those running for the U.S. Senate.[415][416]
By early 2014, the lack of a clear mainstream Republican candidate for the 2016 presidential election led some supporters, donors, and pollsters to suggest Romney stage a third run.[412] Regarding such a possibility, Romney at first responded, “Oh, no, no, no. No, no, no, no, no. No, no, no.”[412] Nevertheless, speculation continued: the continuing unpopularity of Obama led to buyer’s remorse among some voters; the 2014 Russian military intervention in Ukraine made Romney’s “No. 1 geopolitical foe” remark look prescient; and an August 2014 poll of Iowan Republicans showed Romney with a large lead there over other potential 2016 candidates.[418] A poll conducted in July 2014 by CNN showed Romney with a 53 to 44 lead over Obama in a hypothetical election “redo.”[419][420] By early 2015, Romney was actively considering the idea and contacting his network of supporters.[421][422] In doing so he was positioning himself in the invisible primary – the preliminary jockeying for the backing of party leaders, donors, and political operatives – against former Florida governor Jeb Bush, who had already set a likely campaign in motion and would be a rival to Romney for establishment Republican support.[422][423] Despite support in some quarters for a third bid for the presidency, there was a backlash against him from conservatives who wanted a fresher face without a history of presidential losses,[424] and many of Romney’s past donors were not willing to commit to him again.[425] Romney announced on January 30, 2015 that he would not run for president in 2016, saying that while he thought he could win the nomination, “one of our next generation of Republican leaders” would be better positioned to win the general election.[426][427]
As the Republican presidential nomination race went into the primaries season, Romney had not endorsed anyone but was one of the Republican establishment figures who were becoming increasingly concerned about the front-runner status of New York businessman Donald Trump.[428] Romney publicly criticized Trump for not releasing his taxes, saying there might be a “bombshell” in them.[429] Trump responded by calling Romney “one of the dumbest and worst candidates in the history of Republican politics.”[428] Then Romney gave a speech on March 3, 2016, at the Hinckley Institute of Politics, that represented a scathing attack on Trump’s personal behavior, business performance, and domestic and foreign policy stances. He said Trump was “a phony, a fraud … He’s playing members of the American public for suckers” and that “If we Republicans choose Donald Trump as our nominee, the prospects for a safe and prosperous future are greatly diminished.”[430][431] In response Trump dismissed Romney as a “choke artist”.[431] Romney’s speech represented an unprecedented attack by a major U.S. party’s most recent presidential nominee against the party’s current front-runner for the nomination.[431][432][433] Romney encouraged Republicans to engage in tactical voting, by supporting whichever of the remaining rivals had the best chance to beat Trump in any given state,[434] and as such Romney announced he was voting for, although not endorsing, Ted Cruz for president prior to the March 22 Utah caucus.[435] As the race went on there was some evidence of tactical voting occurring, and some partial arrangements were formed among candidates,[436][437] but by May 3 Trump had defeated all his opponents and became the party’s presumptive nominee. Romney then announced that he would not support Trump in the general election, saying, “I am dismayed at where we are now, I wish we had better choices”.[438]
In June, Romney said that he wouldn’t vote for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton either, saying: “It’s a matter of personal conscience. I can’t vote for either of those two people.”[439] He suggested that he may vote for a third-party candidate, or write-in his wife’s name, saying she would be “an ideal president”.[439] When pressed on who of Trump and Clinton was more qualified to be President, Romney quoted P. J. O’Rourke: “Hillary Clinton is wrong on every issue, but she’s wrong within the normal parameters.”[439] He considered voting for the Libertarian ticket of former Republican Governors Gary Johnson and William Weld, saying that he would “get to know Gary Johnson better and see if he’s someone who I could end up voting for”, adding that “if Bill Weld were at the top of the ticket, it would be very easy for me to vote for Bill Weld for president.”[440]In September he called for Johnson to be included in the presidential debates[441] and in October it emerged that Independent candidate Evan McMullin was using an email list of 2.5 million Romney supporters to raise money.[442] McMullin’s chief strategist said that it was purchased from Romney for President and that “we’ll let other folks discuss what that may mean and certainly never speak for [Romney]”.[442] A spokeswoman for Romney said that the list had been “rented by several political candidates in the presidential primary, and by countless other political and commercial users in the time since the 2012 campaign”[442] and Romney made no public comment on McMullin’s candidacy.[443] Romney and his wife cast early ballots in Utah, but he declined to say who he voted for.[443] After Trump won the election, Romney congratulated him via phone call and on Twitter.[444]
Economist Peter Schiff Warns that a Financial Crisis Bigger than 2008 is Coming
Bill Gross No ‘bull market’ under Trump
Buffett: The U.S. economy is ‘softer than people think?
Rickards Trump will win, markets to crash, Gold to rise $10k oz
Heinrich Questions Federal Reserve Chair On State Of The Economy
U.S. economy near the danger zone?
11 VERY DEPRESSING ECONOMIC REALITIES THAT DONALD TRUMP WILL INHERIT FROM BARACK OBAMA
Central Bankers Continually Pushing War As The Economy Falters – Episode 427
U.S. Economic Confidence Surges After Election
by Justin McCarthy and Jeffrey M. Jones
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Economic Confidence Index climbs 13 points
Index positive for the first time since March 2015
Republicans’ economic outlook improves drastically
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Americans’ confidence in the U.S. economy increased sharply after the election, moving from a slightly negative evaluation (-10) to a slightly positive one (+3). Gallup’s U.S. Economic Confidence Index had been consistently negative throughout the year leading up to the election.
Gallup’s U.S. Economic Confidence Index, Before and After the Election
Nov 1-7, 2016
Nov 9-13, 2016
-10
+3
GALLUP DAILY TRACKING
Gallup’s U.S. Economic Confidence Index is the average of two components: how Americans rate current economic conditions and whether they feel the economy is improving or getting worse. The index has a theoretical maximum of +100 if all Americans were to say the economy is doing well and improving, and a theoretical minimum of -100 if all Americans were to say the economy is doing poorly and getting worse.
The index has registered positive only a handful of times over the nine years Gallup has tracked it daily — the most recent being March 2015. For the week of Nov. 7-13, including two pre-election and five post-election days of interviewing, the index averaged 0.
The increase in economic confidence mostly stems from Republicans’ more positive views after Republican Donald Trump won the election. Gallup has previously noted that Americans view the economy through a political lens. Republicans have had a dismal view of the economy — especially of its future direction — during Democratic President Barack Obama’s two terms.
Republicans’ Economic Outlook Improves Substantially
After Trump won last week’s election, Republicans and Republican-leaning independents now have a much more optimistic view of the U.S. economy’s outlook than they did before the election. Just 16% of Republicans said the economy was getting better in the week before the election, while 81% said it was getting worse. Since the election, 49% say it is getting better and 44% worse.
Conversely, Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents’ confidence in the economy plummeted after the election. Before the election, 61% of Democrats said the economy was getting better and 35% worse. Now, Democrats are evenly divided, with 46% saying it is getting better and 47% saying it is getting worse.
Perceptions of Whether Economy Is Getting Better or Worse by Political Party, Before and After the 2016 Presidential Election
Republicans, pre-election (Nov 1-7)
Republicans, post-election (Nov 9-13)
Democrats, pre-election (Nov 1-7)
Democrats, post-election (Nov 9-13)
% Getting better
16
49
61
46
% Getting worse
81
44
35
47
Index (% better minus % worse)
-65
+5
+26
-1
Party groups include independents who lean to the party
GALLUP DAILY TRACKING
Republicans Less Negative About Current Economic Conditions
In addition to being more optimistic about the economy’s future than they were before the election, Republicans are also slightly less negative about where economic conditions currently stand — likely because they will have a Republican president in the near future. However, they remain negative overall about the current state of the economy under the incumbent Democratic president. It is likely that their view of current economic conditions will further improve, possibly into positive territory, when Trump takes office in January.
Republicans’ current conditions component score has increased to -5, up significantly from -21 before the election. The latest score is the result of 21% of Republicans saying the economy is “excellent” or “good,” and 26% saying it is “poor.”
Democrats, on the other hand, have become more negative in their views of the current state of the U.S. economy, but the change is smaller among this group. Democrats’ component score fell to +17 after the election, compared with +26 beforehand. Bottom Line
The election of Trump has transformed the way Republicans and Democrats view the economy, particularly in their assessments of whether it is getting better or worse. But given the political and economic tumult of the past week, measures of the index in the coming weeks may be more indicative of U.S. economic confidence in the year ahead. On the one hand, global markets trembled on election night as Trump’s victory became clearer. On the other hand, U.S. markets rallied later in the week, with the Dow Jones industrial average reaching a new high on Monday.
It’s too early to say whether these are sustainable gains in confidence. But in the immediate future, Trump’s victory has improved his party’s confidence in the economy. Barring any major events, it is likely that Republicans will shift to a positive index score once the incoming president takes office, while Democrats’ confidence will take a hit.
Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted Nov. 9-13, 2016, on the Gallup U.S. Daily survey, with a random sample of 2,532 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±2 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. All reported margins of sampling error include computed design effects for weighting.
Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 60% cellphone respondents and 40% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods.
Story 1: Will Trump Stop The Dumbing Down of Education By Appointing Larry P. Arnn The Last Secretary of the Department of Education? –American People Would Cheer!– Videos
Larry P. Arnn Wins 2015 Bradley Prize
Published on Jun 16, 2015
Dr. Larry P. Arnn, president of Hillsdale College, was presented with the 2015 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Achievement.
Trump and Conservatism – Constitution Day Celebration
Published on Sep 17, 2016
Hillsdale College President Larry P. Arnn, National Review Senior Editor Jonah Goldberg, and Professor of Political Science John Marini discuss presidential candidate Donald J. Trump’s role in conservatism in America.
“Education and Politics” – Larry P. Arnn
Dr. Larry P. Arnn at Freshman Convocation | Hillsdale College
Larry Arnn on Reclaiming America’s First Principles
What Problem Does the Constitution Solve?
“Conservatism and Constitutionalism” – Larry P. Arnn
Education, Self-Government and Our Current Crisis
Time to Give Up or Time to Fight On?
Introduction to the U.S. Constitution – 2011-09 – Dr. Larry Arnn
Charlotte Iserbyt – Deliberate Dumbing Down of the World
Charlotte Iserbyt: The Miseducation of America
Trump says he’s going to cut Dept of Ed and EPA
Donald trump on cutting the EPA an department of education (CleanAirMatters)
Abolish Public Education: Privatize All Schools – Ron Paul (1988)
Rand Paul – Eliminating the Department of Education
Ted Cruz Abolish the Dept of Education AFP Defending the American Dream Summit 08 22 2015
The Cruz Radical Agenda: Eliminate the Dept. of Education
Glenn Beck -4-14-2010-The Plan Part 3- Abolish The Department of Education Part 1
National Campaign Launched to Abolish U.S. Education Department
THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION FOR PRESIDENT-ELECT TRUMP SHOULD BE … NOBODY
By: Brian Darling | November 14, 2016
Now that President-elect Donald J. Trump has shocked the world and won the presidency, the talk has quickly shifted to the individuals he should consider for positions in his administration.
President-elect Donald Trump does not have the traditional cadre of Washington insiders and donors to build out his Cabinet, but his transition team has spent the past several months quietly building a short list of industry titans and conservative activists who could comprise one of the more eclectic and controversial presidential Cabinets in modern history.
As USA Today reports, there are plenty of names being floated for various administration positions. However, the best way to make the federal government great again (if that is even possible) is to shrink it. One interesting appointment should be Trump’s decision on who is to be the next Secretary of Education, and he could use that appointment to send a strong small government message. In Trump’s book, as reported by Business Insider, Trump has implied that the U.S Department of Education should be abolished.
During his campaign, President-elect Donald Trump repeatedly hit at the role of federal government in education, arguing instead for increased local control of schools. He has also hinted that the Department of Education should be abolished.
“A lot of people believe the Department of Education should just be eliminated. Get rid of it. If we don’t eliminate it completely, we certainly need to cut its power and reach,” he wrote in his book “Great Again: How to Fix Our Crippled America.”
It would be a bold move for President Trump to refuse to nominate a new head of the Department of Education to show that he is committed to abolishing it. For years, abolishing the Department of Education was part of the Republican platform until President George W. Bush teamed up with a liberal icon, the late Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, to pass No Child Left Behind that expanded federal intervention in education.
Education is best left to the states. That issue came into focus again when in May the Obama administration issued a letter ordering every public school in America to allow transgender students to use the bathroom of the opposite sex. Furthermore, the Department of Justice sued North Carolina over a law that prohibited people from the opposite sex to use public bathrooms. This action showed all followers of national news that the power of the federal government over education policy has gone haywire.
When one scans the Constitution, one cannot find any reference to education policy as an enumerated power of the federal government. Education has traditionally been a function of the states and ideas like No Child Left Behind have perverted that concept.
The time is now to create some incremental change in federal policy, particularly with regard to education. A good first step to at least scaling back the Department of Education would be for President Donald J. Trump to refuse to appoint anyone to be the next Secretary of Education.
Bruce Fein, former Associate Deputy Attorney General and General Counsel to the FCC under President Ronald Reagan takes my recommendation a few steps further and tells Conservative Review,
Trump should refuse to fill Department of Education, HUD, Department of Energy, Department of Commerce, Department of Labor, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Consumer Finance Protection Board. If there are one or a few serious things any of these agencies do, Trump should transfer them to another Cabinet Department, like DOE control over nuclear facilities.
That would be a bold, bold move and would show that Trump truly is coming to Washington to dismantle big government.
The time is now to create some incremental change in federal policy, particularly with regard to education.
At a minimum, leaving the Secretary of Education position vacant would be a daring move that would help in convincing conservative and libertarian Republicans that the president-elect is serious about implementing small government reforms.
Filling the dozen top jobs in Trump’s Department of Education
Frederick M. Hess
In Washington, when a new president is elected, it sparks weeks of feverish ruminating on each personnel decision, with breathless discussions of everything from high-profile cabinet appointments to who should (or will) be the Bureau of Migratory Waterfowl’s next deputy assistant secretary for planning and policy. All of this tends to invest these jobs with more glamour than they probably deserve—since they’re mostly marathons of meetings, glad-handing, budgeting, damage control, and bureaucratic oversight. But that’s how Washington works.
And the truth is that these appointments really do matter. As the old saw has it: “Personnel is policy.” It’s the appointees in the various departments who will ultimately shape the Trump administration’s educational priorities and agenda. This has never been truer than now, given how much of Trump’s educational platform is a blank slate—or one filled with only the broadest of notional directives (e.g. school choice good, Common Core bad).
I’ll be clear: I don’t know who will populate the Trump administration’s Department of Education. I do have a few thoughts on some of the folks I’d like to see in the mix, though—and I figured I’d share them with you, if only so that fewer folks feel obliged to inquire. Please understand that this isn’t an exhaustive, careful, or complete list. After all, I have no particular thoughts, for instance, on the commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration. It’s more an eclectic mix of some names I’d like to see considered. I’m sure I’ve forgotten some names that I’d have included if I’d given this more thought, and it’s obviously limited to individuals who I’m guessing/hoping might be willing to serve in this choice-friendly, Common Core-skeptical, Republican administration. I’ve also omitted some of the most outspoken NeverTrumpers (like John Bailey and Mike Petrilli), for obvious reasons.
Keep in mind that I have no juice in any of this and there’s no reason to expect anyone to listen to me. But so it goes. With all that in mind, here are some of the names I’d love to see considered for a dozen of the top jobs (I’m not bothering with bios or current positions; if you don’t know who someone is, just ride the google):
U.S. Secretary of Education: Mitch Daniels, Scott Walker, Bill Evers, Gerard Robinson
Deputy Secretary: David Cleary, Brian Jones, Lisa Graham Keegan, Larry Arnn
Under Secretary: Nina Rees, Paul Pastorek, Jim Peyser, Vic Klatt, Hanna Skandera
Assistant Secretary – Civil Rights: Joshua Dunn, Greg Lukianoff, Robert Scott
Assistant Secretary – Communications and Outreach: Jenna Talbot, Joy Pullmann, Holly Kuzmich
Assistant Secretary – Elementary and Secondary Education: Dwight Jones, Robert Pondiscio, Tom Luna, Matt Ladner, Jim Stergios
Assistant Secretary – Legislation and Congressional Affairs: Lindsay Fryer, D’arcy Philps, Lindsey Burke
Assistant Secretary – Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development: Peter Oppenheim, Brad Thomas, Andy Smarick, Robert Enlow
Assistant Secretary – Postsecondary Education: Andrew Kelly, Jason Delisle, James Bergeron
Assistant Secretary – Special Education and Rehabilitative Services: Joe Siedlecki, Mike McShane, Max Eden
Assistant Secretary – Vocational and Adult Education: Tom Stewart, Tony Bennett
Institute of Education Sciences – Director: Patrick Wolf, Jay Greene, Caroline Hoxby, Martin West, Rick Hanushek
President-elect Donald Trump doesn’t have a track record on education, which means that his choice of education secretary will send a really important signal on where he wants to go in terms of policy on the Every Student Succeeds Act, higher education, and more.
So who is on the short list? Tough to say, but here are some names making the rounds inside the Beltway:
Dr. Ben Carson: The neurosurgeon was among Trump’s opponents in the Republican presidential primaries and later endorsed him. As a candidate, Carson’s proposed education agenda, like Trump’s, centered on school choice. It’s easy to imagine that Carson, who is famous for separating conjoined twins, would spend a lot of time as secretary talking about the importance of science education. It’s unclear what form that would take though, given some of Carson’s other views. As secretary, Carson could revive the culture wars over how to teach evolution, since he’s said in the past he doesn’t believe in it. UPDATE: It doesn’t look like Carson is interested in serving in Trump’s cabinet, according to Bloomberg.
Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin: Walker, also a one-time Trump GOP primary rival, is probably best known for rolling back collective bargaining rights for public employees, including teachers, in Wisconsin. It’s unclear if he wants to sit at the helm of the education department, but a lot of Republicans in Washington have him on the top of their wish list. Since Walker is, or at least was, a rising star in the party, such a pick could elevate the importance of the issue.
Williamson Evers: A research fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, he served in a top policymaking role—assistant secretary of planning, evaluation, and policy—during the tail end of the President George W. Bush’s administration. Evers, who has worked for past GOP presidential campaigns, is also a leader of the Trump transition team. He’s a veteran of the so-called “math wars” in California, has opposed teacher tenure, and was part of the Bush administration’s efforts to restart K-12 education in Iraq. More in this story. One possibility: Evers doesn’t become secretary, but gets a key role in the administration that could matter just as much on K-12, such as deputy secretary (the No. 2 post in the department).
Rep. Luke Messer, of Indiana: The GOP congressman pushed legislation that would allow Title I money for disadvantaged kids to follow students to the school of their choice, including a private school. That proposal ultimately foundered, but Messer has done some deep thinking on the question of how small-government-friendly Republicans could push choice. And he has a track record of working in a bipartisan way. He’s teamed up with Rep. Jared Polis, D-Colo., on student data privacy legislation, for instance.
Former Indiana state chief Tony Bennett: Bennett, who was a driving force in Chiefs for Change in its early days, is close to both former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and incoming Vice President Mike Pence, who served as governor of Indiana. As state chief, Bennett, a Republican, pushed for an ambitious education redesign agenda, including teacher evaluation through student outcomes, A through F grades for schools, an expansion of charter schools and vouchers, and more. He was also a consistent supporter of the Common Core State Standards, which Trump doesn’t like. But his hard charging style didn’t sit well with some educators, and he was defeated in his bid for re-election by Glenda Ritz, a Democrat. (Ritz went on to lose her own re-election bid this year.) Later, Bennett became Florida’s state chief.
But he came under scrutiny when emails showed that, during his tenure in Indiana, he had changed the grade of a charter school from “C” to “A.” The school, Christel House, was run by a philanthropist who donated to Bennett’s campaign. Bennett left his gig in Florida, and was ultimately cleared of ethics violations by the Indiana State Ethics Commission. He was found guilty of using state resources for political purposes, and had to pay a $5,000 fine.
Admiral William McRaven: He is a former United States Navy admiral who oversaw special operations, and is the current chancellor of the University of Texas system. He’d be the first secretary with a primarily higher education background since Lauro Cavazos who served as education secretary under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
Tony Zeiss: The former president of Central Piedmont Community College in Charlotte, N.C. retired in February after more than two decades of service. The school became a national leader in workforce development under his watch, according to the Charlotte Observer. His work even got a shout-out in President Barack Obama’s 2012 State of the Union address. Zeiss, whose name surfaced late Tuesday, would be another higher education pick. And like Pence, he’s a Hoosier.
Eva Moskowitz or Michelle Rhee: Both of these “reformey” Democrats were floated by a Trump spokesman during an appearence on MSNBC. Moskowitz is the founder of Success Academy Charter Schools, Rhee is the controversial former chancellor of public schools in the District of Columbia, where she pushed through policies like performance pay. Both are Democrats, so their policies could be pretty different from most of the other folks on this list.
Jeanne Allen: She’s a long-time school choice advocate who founded the Center for Education Reform, which champions vouchers and charter schools. Allen served as a senior aide at the U.S. Department of Education under President Ronald Reagan. In May, Allen said she rejected the opportunity to advise Trump’s campaign on education issues, telling us, “I don’t want my issues coming out of his mouth.”
It sounds like Allen may have reconsidered since then. She was heartened by the selection of Pence, and campaign manager Kellyanne Conway, she said on Twitter.
In addition, two other school choice advocates, Betty DeVos, a philanthropist, and Kevin Chavous, a former D.C. City council member and a Democrat, are also possibilities. Both sit on the board of directors of the American Federation for Children, a school choice advocacy organization. (Hat tip: Politico). And CNN has reported that Michelle Rhee, the former DC schools chancellor, is on the short list.
Of course, filling the lower-level positions at the department, such as the deputy secretary and assistant secretaries, can have an equally outsized impact on K-12. Over at Rick Hess Straight Up, the education policy director at AEI has some ideas.
Dumbing down is the deliberate oversimplification of intellectual content within education, literature, cinema, news, video games and culture in order to relate to those unable to assimilate more sophisticated information. The term “dumbing down” originated in 1933 as movie-business slang, used by motion picture screenplay writers, meaning: “[to] revise so as to appeal to those of little education or intelligence”.[1] Dumbing-down varies according to subject matter along with the reasons for lowering the intellect of the subject or topic. It often involves diminishment of critical thought involving the undermining of intellectual standards within language and learning; thus trivializing meaningful information, culture, and academic standards, as is the case of popular culture.
In the late 20th century, the proportion of young people attending university in the UK increased sharply, including many who previously would not have been considered to possess the appropriate scholastic aptitude. In 2003, the UK Minister for Universities, Margaret Hodge, criticised Mickey Mouse degrees as a negative consequence of universities dumbing down their courses to meet “the needs of the market”: these are degrees conferred for studies in a field of endeavour “where the content is perhaps not as [intellectually] rigorous as one would expect, and where the degree, itself, may not have huge relevance in the labour market”: thus, a university degree of slight intellectual substance, which the student earned by “simply stacking up numbers on Mickey Mouse courses, is not acceptable”.[2][3]
In 2007 Wellington Grey, a high school physics instructor in London, published an Internet petition objecting to what he described as a dumbed-down curriculum. He wrote: “I am a physics teacher. Or, at least, I used to be”; and complained that “[Mathematical] calculations – the very soul of physics – are absent from the new General Certificate of Secondary Education.”[4] Among the examples of dumbing-down that he provided were: “Question: Why would radio stations broadcast digital signals, rather than analogue signals? Answer: Can be processed by computer/ipod” to “Question: Why must we develop renewable energy sources?” (a political question).
In Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling (1991, 2002), John Taylor Gatto presented speeches and essays, including “The Psychopathic School”, his acceptance speech for the 1990 New York City Teacher of the Year award, and “The Seven-Lesson Schoolteacher”, his acceptance speech upon being named as the New York State Teacher of the Year for 1991.[5] Gatto writes that while he was hired to teach English and literature, he came to believe he was employed as part of a social engineering project. The “seven lessons” at the foundation of schooling were never explicitly stated, Gatto writes, but included teaching students that their self-worth depended on outside evaluation; that they were constantly ranked and supervised; and that they had no opportunities for privacy or solitude. Gatto speculated:
Was it possible, I had been hired, not to enlarge children’s power, but to diminish it? That seemed crazy, on the face of it, but slowly, I began to realize that the bells and confinement, the crazy sequences, the age-segregation, the lack of privacy, the constant surveillance, and all the rest of the national curriculum of schooling were designed exactly as if someone had set out to prevent children from learning how to think, and act, to coax them into addiction and dependent behavior.[5]
In examining the seven lessons of teaching, Gatto concluded that “all of these lessons are prime training for permanent underclasses, people deprived forever of finding the center of their own special genius.” That “school is a twelve-year jail sentence, where bad habits are the only curriculum truly learned. I teach school, and win awards doing it. I should know.”[5]
Increased business competition and the introduction of econometric methods changed the business practices of the mass communications media. The business monopoly practice of media consolidation reduced the breadth and the depth of the journalism practiced and provided for the information of the public. The reduction of operating costs (overhead expenses) eliminated foreign news bureaus and reporters, in favour of presenting the public relations publications (news releases) of governments, businesses, and political parties as fact.
Refinements in measurement of approval ratings and audience size increased the incentive for journalists and TV producers to write simplistic material, diminishing the intellectual complexity of the argument presented, usually at the expense of factual accuracy and rationality. Cultural theorists, such as Richard Hoggart, Raymond Williams, Neil Postman, Henry Giroux, and Pierre Bourdieu, invoked these effects as evidence that commercial television is an especially pernicious contributor to the dumbing-down of communications. Nonetheless, the cultural critic Stuart Hall said that the people responsible for teaching critical thinking – parents and academic instructors – can improve the quality (breadth and depth) of their instruction by occasionally including television programmes.
In France, Michel Houellebecq has written (not excluding himself) of “the shocking dumbing-down of French culture and intellect as was recently pointed out, [2008] sternly but fairly, by TIME magazine.”[6]
In popular culture
The science fiction film Idiocracy (2005) portrays the U.S. as a greatly dumbed-down society 500 years later, in which the low cultural condition was achieved with dysgenics, over-reproduction by people of low intelligence being greater than the rate of reproduction of people of high intelligence. Similar concepts appeared in earlier works, notably the science fiction short story The Marching Morons (1951), by Cyril M. Kornbluth which also features a modern-day protagonist in a future dominated by low-intelligence persons. Moreover, the novel Brave New World (1931), by Aldous Huxley, discussed the ways that society was effectively dumbed down in order to maintain political stability and social order.
The social critic Paul Fussell touched on these themes (“prole drift”) in his non-fiction book Class: A Guide Through the American Status System (1983)[7] and focused on them specifically in BAD: or, The Dumbing of America(1991).
In 1980, Arnn become an editor for Public Research, Syndicated in the United States.[1] He was one of four founders of the Claremont Institute in Claremont, California, and served as its president from 1985 to 2000.[2][4][5] In 2000, he was named the twelfth president of Hillsdale College.[5] In this capacity, he set the ambitious goal of $400 million for the college’s Founders Campaign, beginning in 2001, and under his watch, several new buildings have arisen on the campus.
Arnn has been a trustee of the conservative Heritage Foundation since 2002.[2] In 2012 it offered its presidency to Arnn, who decided to stay in academe instead.[7]
Discussing politics at Hillsdale, Arnn remarked, “If you take the reading of an old book on the view that it’s valuable, you have already discarded the modern Left.”[9] Arnn supported Donald Trump for President in the 2016 US election[10]
Controversies
“Dark Ones” Comment
In 2013, Arnn was criticized for his remarks about ethnic minorities when he testified before the Michigan State Legislature. In testimony against the Common Core curriculum standards, in which Arnn expressed concern about government interference with educational institutions, he recalled that shortly after he assumed the presidency at Hillsdale he received a letter from the state Department of Education that said his college “violated the standards for diversity,” adding, “because we didn’t have enough dark ones, I guess, is what they meant.” After being criticized for calling minorities “dark ones”, he explained that he was referring to “dark faces”, saying: “The State of Michigan sent a group of people down to my campus, with clipboards … to look at the colors of people’s faces and write down what they saw. We don’t keep records of that information. What were they looking for besides dark ones?”[11] Michigan House Democratic Leader Tim Greimel condemned Arnn for his comments, which he called “offensive” and “inflammatory and bigoted”, and asked for an apology.[12] The College issued a statement apologizing for Arnn’s remark, while reiterating Arnn’s concern about “state sponsored racism” in the form of affirmative action policies.[13]
Bibliography
Liberty and Learning: The Evolution of American Education (2004)
The Founders’ Key: The Divine and Natural Connection Between the Declaration and the Constitution and What We Risk by Losing It
“Churchill’s Trial: Winston Churchill and the Salvation of Free Government” (2015)
Jump up^Higgins, Lori; Jesse, David (August 1, 2013). “Hillsdale president get heat over racial remark”. Detroit Free Press. Retrieved September 26, 2013. ‘No offense was intended by the use of that term except to the offending bureaucrats, and Dr. Arnn is sorry if such offense was honestly taken. But the greater concern, he believes, is the state-endorsed racism the story illustrates.’
Story 1: The Winner Trump Transition Team Selects Cabinet and 4000 Plus Federal Positions — Suggestions By The Loser Lying Lunatic Left and Big Lie Media Ignored — Videos
‘Knife fight’ as Trump builds Cabinet
‘Knife fight’ as Trump builds an unconventional national security cabinet
Trump leans toward loyalists as he mulls Cabinet picks
Trump’s son-in-law could take on powerful WH role
RON PAUL URGENT WARNING TO TRUMP — A “Shadow Government” Will Infiltrate Your Cabinet!!!
‘Knife fight’ as Trump builds an unconventional national security cabinet
Trump Announces Transition Team – Sessions, Giuliani, Gingrich and More!!
Christie Transition Stomped By Trump Insiders
Trump Transition Team Working To Staff Cabinet Positions – Greg Gutfeld
Donald Trump’s Leading Cabinet Picks
Vice President-elect Mike Pence to lead Trump’s transition team
Trump turns over transition team to Pence
Trump Transition Team Shake-Up
The Donald Trump Agenda And His Cabinet #PresidentTrump
What Would A Donald Trump Cabinet Look Like? – The Trump Campaign – Hannity
Meet the potential first lady: Melania Trump
Melania Trump – The Woman Behind Donald
Meet Trump’s Cabinet-in-waiting
He’s expected to reward the band of surrogates who stood by him.
President-elect Donald Trump does not have the traditional cadre of Washington insiders and donors to build out his Cabinet, but his transition team has spent the past several months quietly building a short list of industry titans and conservative activists who could comprise one of the more eclectic and controversial presidential Cabinets in modern history.
Trumpworld has started with a mandate to hire from the private sector whenever possible. That’s why the Trump campaign is seriously considering Forrest Lucas, the 74-year-old co-founder of oil products company Lucas Oil, as a top contender for Interior secretary, or donor and Goldman Sachs veteran Steven Mnuchin as Treasury secretary.
He’s also expected to reward the band of surrogates who stood by him during the bruising presidential campaign, including Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani and Chris Christie, all of whom are being considered for top posts. A handful of Republican politicians may also make the cut, including Sen. Bob Corker for secretary of state or Sen. Jeff Sessions for secretary of defense.
Trump’s divisive campaign may make it difficult for him to attract top talent, especially since so many politicians and wonks openly derided the president-elect over the past year. And Trump campaign officials have worried privately that they will have difficulty finding high-profile women to serve in his cabinet, according to a person familiar with the campaign’s internal discussions, given Trump’s past comments about women.
Still, two Trump transition officials said they received an influx of phone calls and emails in recent weeks, as the polls tightened and a Trump White House seemed more within reach.
So far, the Trump campaign and transition teams have been tight-lipped about their picks. (The Trump campaign has declined to confirm cabinet speculation.) But here’s the buzz from POLITICO’s conversations with policy experts, lobbyists, academics, congressional staffers and people close to Trump.
Secretary of state
Former House Speaker Gingrich, a leading Trump supporter, is a candidate for the job, as is Corker, current chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The Tennessee senator has said he’d “strongly consider” serving as secretary of state.
Trump is also eyeing former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton.
Treasury secretary
Trump himself has indicated that he wants to give the Treasury secretary job to his finance chairman, Mnuchin, a 17-year-veteran of Goldman Sachs who now works as the chairman and chief executive of the private investment firm Dune Capital Management. Mnuchin has also worked for OneWest Bank, which was later sold to CIT Group in 2015.
Secretary of defense
Among the Republican defense officials who could join the Trump administration:Sessions (R-Ala.), a close adviser, has been discussed as a potential defense secretary. Former National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley and former Sen. Jim Talent (R-Mo.) have also been mentioned as potential candidates.
Top Trump confidant retired Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, would need a waiver from Congress to become defense secretary, as the law requires retired military officers to wait seven years before becoming the civilian leader of the Pentagon. But Trump’s chief military adviser is likely to wind up in some senior administration post, potentially national security adviser. And other early endorsers, like Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), could be in line for top posts as well.
Attorney general
People close to Trump say former New York City Mayor Giuliani, one of Trump’s leading public defenders, is the leading candidate for attorney general. New Jersey Gov. Christie, another vocal Trump supporter and the head of the president-elect’s transition team, is also a contender for the job — though any role in the cabinet for Christie could be threatened by the Bridgegate scandal.
Another possibility: Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, though the controversyover Trump’s donation to Bondi could undercut her nomination.
Interior secretary
Lucas, the 74-year-old co-founder of oil products company Lucas Oil, is seen as a top contender for Interior secretary.
Trump’s presidential transition team is also eyeing venture capitalist Robert Grady, a George H.W. Bush White House official with ties to Christie. And Trump’s son Donald Trump Jr., is said to be interested in the job.
Meanwhile, a person who spoke to the Trump campaign told POLITICO that the aides have also discussed tapping Sarah Palin for Interior secretary. Trump has said he’d like to put Palin in his cabinet, and Palin has made no secret of her interest.
Other possible candidates include former Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer; Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin; Wyoming Rep. Cynthia Lummis; and Oklahoma oilman Harold Hamm.
Agriculture secretary
There are several names being considered by Trump aides for agriculture secretary, according to multiple sources familiar with the transition. The president-elect has a deep bench to pull from, with nearly 70 leaders on his agricultural advisory committee.
The most controversial name on the transition’s current short list is Sid Miller, the current secretary of agriculture in Texas, who caused a firestorm just days ago after his campaign’s Twitter account referred to Hillary Clinton as a “c—.” Miller said it was a staffer mistake and apologized.
Other names include Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback; former Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman; former Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue; and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry; as well as Charles Herbster, Republican donor and agribusiness leader; and Mike McCloskey, a major dairy executive in Indiana, according to Arabella Advisors, a firm that advises top foundations and closely tracked both transition efforts.
Bruce Rastetter, a major Republican donor in Iowa, and Kip Tom, a farmer who ran for Congress in Indiana this year but was defeated in the primary, are also among those being considered, Arabella said.
Other top Republican insiders expect that Chuck Connor, president and CEO of the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives; Don Villwock, president of the Indiana Farm Bureau; and Ted McKinney, current director of the Indiana Department of Agriculture in administration of Gov. Mike Pence, are also likely to be in the running for the post.
Commerce secretary
Trump is expected to look to the business community for this job.
Billionaire investor Wilbur Ross, a Trump economic adviser, could fit the bill. Dan DiMicco, former CEO of steelmaker Nucor Corp and a Trump trade adviser, is another possibility.
Trump is said to also be considering former Texas Gov. Perry, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and even Christie for the job.
Labor secretary
As with many Cabinet posts under Trump, the campaign and transition staff have been looking for a CEO or executive to lead the Labor Department. One name being bandied about is Victoria Lipnic, commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission since 2010. She also served as an assistant secretary of labor for employment standards from 2002 until 2009. The Mitt Romney transition team reportedly also considered her for a top labor post in 2012.
Health and Human Services secretary
Among the names receiving buzz: Florida Gov. Rick Scott, Gingrich and Ben Carson, a former GOP presidential candidate. Carson has received the most attention lately for HHS, even from Trump himself.
At a recent anti-Obamacare rally, Trump went out of his way to praise Carson by calling him a “brilliant” physician. “I hope that he will be very much involved in my administration in the coming years,” Trump said.
One longer shot would be Rich Bagger, executive director of the Trump transition team and a former pharmaceutical executive who led, behind closed doors, many of the meetings this fall with health care industry donors and executives.
Energy secretary
Continental Resources CEO Hamm has long been seen as a leading candidate for energy secretary. Hamm, an Oklahoma billionaire who has been a friend of Trump’s for years, has been the leading influence on Trump’s energy policy during the campaign.
If Hamm passes, venture capitalist Robert Grady is also seen as a top candidate, though he could also be in line for Interior.
Education secretary
Trump has made clear the Education Department would play a reduced role in his administration — if it exists at all. He has suggested he may try to do away with it altogether.
The GOP nominee has also offered a few hints about who he would pick to lead the department while it’s still around. Among those who may be on the shortlist is Carson, the retired neurosurgeon who ran against Trump in the primary but later endorsed the Republican presidential candidate. Education Insider, a monthly survey of congressional staff, federal officials and other “insiders,” said in May that Carson was Trump’s most likely pick.
Another possible education secretary under Trump is William Evers, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution who has worked on education matters for the Trump transition team. Evers worked at the Education Department during the Bush administration and served as a senior adviser to then-Education Secretary Margaret Spellings.
Veterans Affairs secretary
The name most commonly mentioned for Veterans Affairs secretary is House Veterans’ Affairs Chairman Jeff Miller, who’s retiring from the House and was an early Trump backer.
Homeland Security secretary
One person close to Trump’s campaign said David Clarke, the conservative sheriff of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, is a possible candidate for Homeland Security secretary. Clarke has cultivated a devoted following on the right, and he spoke at the Republican National Convention in Ohio, declaring, “Blue lives matter.” Christie is also seen as a possible DHS secretary.
Environmental Protection Agency administrator
While Trump has called for eliminating the EPA, he has more recently modified that position, saying in September that he’ll “refocus the EPA on its core mission of ensuring clean air, and clean, safe drinking water for all Americans.”
Myron Ebell, a climate skeptic who is running the EPA working group on Trump’s transition team, is seen as a top candidate to lead the agency. Ebell, an official at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, has come under fire from environmental groups for his stances on global warming. Venture capitalist Robert Grady is also a contender.
Other potential candidates: Joe Aiello, director of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s Division of Environmental Safety and Quality Assurance; Carol Comer, the commissioner of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management, who was appointed by Pence; and Leslie Rutledge, attorney general of Arkansas and a lead challenger of EPA regulations in the state.
Bryan Bender, Jeremy Herb, Connor O’Brien, Joanne Kenen, Marianne Levine, Michael Crowley, Doug Palmer, Nahal Toosi, Helena Bottemiller Evich, Zachary Warmbrodt, Ian Kullgren and Benjamin Wermund contributed to this report.
A list of possible Trump cabinet picks that everyone has had to Google
In a modern-day Horatio Alger “rags to riches” story, many of the people that seem to be in line to serve in the cabinet of President-elect Donald Trump were in the policy wilderness prior to Nov. 8.
Many are so little-known that the players of Washington’s favorite parlor game — guessing the president-elect’s new cabinet — are forced to use Google searches. It seems that Trump’s road to the White House was so unexpected inside the beltway that Washington insiders spent little time trying to nail down their picks for administration positions.
But speculation has been intensifying by the minute about who will get tapped by Trump to serve in his cabinet. So far the Trump campaign has been tight-lipped about its picks. On Friday, Trump promised decisions on his administration “soon.”
Here’s a compilation of the latest names who seem to have the inside track to join Trump’s team.
Secretary of State: Talk has centered around Sen. Bob Corker, the Tennessee Republican who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Trump supporter Newt Gingrich is said to be interested, too. The least-known candidate mentioned is former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, who worked for president George W. Bush, but has spent the Barack Obama years “in self-imposed isolation” writing fierce op-eds about the axis of evil, according to the New York Review of Books.
Treasury Secretary: The little-known candidate here is Steve Mnuchin, formerly of Goldman Sachs and Trump’s finance chairman. Mnuchin is also a prodigious producer of Hollywood movies, including “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.” But other, more-famous, names keep popping up, including J.P. Morgan JPM, -0.19% chief Jamie Dimon. The Wall Street Journal said Rep. Jeb Hensarling, the Republican from Texas who is the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, is being considered for the post.
Attorney General: Fans of “House of Cards” should watch this race as it seems that many close associates of Trump are vying to be America’s top cop. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and Alabama Republican Sen. Jeffrey Sessions, all very close to Trump, are said to contenders for the job.
Story 1: Trump Appoints Stephen K. Bannon, Chief Strategist and Senior Counselor — Great Outstanding Choice — Panics Big Lie Media and Lying Lunatic Left Who See Bannon As An Existential Threat — American People Reject Obama and Clinton and Warfare and Welfare Socialism — Republican Party Heading Center Right — I Will Believe When I See It! — Videos
REINCE PRIEBUS TO BE CHIEF OF STAFF! STEVE BANNON AS CHIEF STRATEGIST! GREAT DECISION!
Donald Trump Appoints Reince Priebus, Stephen Bannon
Who Is Stephen Bannon?
Stephen K. Bannon on Breitbart News Daily (11/9/2016)
Stone: Steve Bannon As Trump Chief Of Staff
Mark Cuban: Steve Bannon Is Smarter Than Donald Trump | All In | MSNBC
Why Steve Bannon is not your traditional political wonk
Stephen K. Bannon of Breitbart News
Steve Bannon Declares: Trump-led Movement ‘Is at the Top of the First Inning’
Stephen K. Bannon at The Liberty Restoration Foundation
Uploaded on Nov 20, 2011
The Undefeated Director Stephen K. Bannon at the inaugural Liberty Restoration Foundation in Orlando, FL
The Undefeated Director Stephen K. Bannon on Hannity
‘The Undefeated’ – Stephen K. Bannon Interview
Trump advisor whines that calling out Bannon’s white supremacist ties is ‘divisive’
Stephen K. Bannon at Tea Party, New York City, 2010
Donald Trump shifts position on Obamacare in 60 Minutes interview
Donald Trump’s first 60 min. Interview/ Trump Tower Now A Fortress 11-11-16
Trump Considers Racist Anti-Semite Stephen Bannon as White House Chief of Staff – DISGRACE
President Elect Trump picks Priebus as White House chief of staff, Bannon as top adviser
Trump names RNC’s Priebus as chief of staff
Trump Hits Campaign Reset Button AGAIN
2/23/10 Hannity Special “Generation Zero” Part 1
2/23/10 Hannity Special “Generation Zero” Part 2
2/23/10 Hannity Special “Generation Zero” Part 3
2/23/10 Hannity Special “Generation Zero” Part 4
2/23/10 Hannity Special “Generation Zero” Part 5
2/23/10 Hannity Special “Generation Zero” Part 6
Generation Zero Full Documentary | Citizens United – Documentaries
Critics See Stephen Bannon, Trump’s Pick for Strategist, as Voice of Racism
Soros Prepares For Trump War
CHRISTIAN DATOC, Reporter
George Soros and his fellow liberal mega-donors are currently readying the post-Hillary Clinton Democratic party to oppose President-Elect Donald Trump.
This article may be affected by a current event. Information in this article may change rapidly as the event progresses. Initial news reports may be unreliable. Thelast updates to this article may not reflect the most current information. (November 2016)
Stephen Kevin “Steve” Bannon (born November 27, 1953) is an American businessman and media executive. He is the executive chairman of Breitbart News, a politically conservative American news, opinion and commentary website noted for its connection to the alt-right.[1][2] Bannon will be Chief Strategist and Senior Counselor of the upcomingTrump Administration.[3] He became chief executive officer of the 2016 presidential campaign of Donald Trump in August 2016.[4][5]
After his military service, Bannon worked at Goldman Sachs as an investment banker in the Mergers & Acquisitions Department.[10] In 1990, Bannon and several colleagues from Goldman Sachs launched Bannon & Co., a boutique investment bank specializing in media. Through Bannon & Co., Bannon negotiated the sale of Castle Rock Entertainment to Ted Turner. As payment, Bannon & Co. accepted a stake in five television shows, includingSeinfeld. Société Générale purchased Bannon & Co. in 1998.[11]
In 1993, while still managing Bannon & Co., Bannon was made acting director of Earth-science research project Biosphere 2 in Oracle, Arizona. Under Bannon, the project shifted emphasis from researching space exploration and colonization towards pollution and global warming. He left the project in 1995.[12][13] After the sale of Bannon & Co., Bannon became an executive producer in Hollywood. He executive produced Anthony Hopkins‘s 1999 filmTitus. Bannon became a partner with entertainment industry executive Jeff Kwatinetz at The Firm, Inc., a film and television management company.[11] In 2004, Bannon made a documentary about Ronald Reagan titled In the Face of Evil. Through the making and screening of this film, Bannon was introduced to Peter Schweizer and publisher Andrew Breitbart.[11]
From 2007 through 2011, Bannon was chairman and CEO of Affinity Media. From March 2012 to August 2016, Bannon was executive chairman of Breitbart News LLC, the parent company of Breitbart.[14][15] Under his leadership, Breitbart took a more alt-right and nationalistic approach towards its agenda.[16] Bannon identifies as a conservative.[17][18][19] Speaking about his role at Breitbart, Bannon said: “We think of ourselves as virulently anti-establishment, particularly ‘anti-‘ the permanent political class.”[20]
Bannon is also executive chairman and co-founder of the Government Accountability Institute, where he helped orchestrate the publication of book Clinton Cash.[6][11] In 2015, Bannon was ranked No. 19 on Mediaite‘s list of the “25 Most Influential in Political News Media 2015”.[21]
The Orthodox Jewish senior-editor-at-large at Breitbart, Joel Pollak, defended Bannon, writing:
“
I have worked with Stephen K. Bannon, President-elect Donald Trump’s new chief strategist and senior counselor, for nearly six years at Breitbart News. I can say, without hesitation, that Steve is a friend of the Jewish people… Steve is outraged by antisemitism. If anything, he is overly sensitive about it, and often takes offense on Jews’ behalf. Steve cares deeply about the fate of Jewish communities in America and throughout the world, a fact that is reflected in Breitbart News’ daily coverage… While being targeted is a badge of honor for Steve, lies are lies, and they deserved to be called what they are.[29]
”
Bannon was, as of mid-August 2016, registered to vote in Miami-Dade County, Florida, at the former residence of Diane Clohesy, Bannon’s third ex-wife, but the residence was vacant and slated for demolition.[30] On August 26, 2016, Bannon’s voter registration information was changed to an address in Sarasota County, an address associated with venture capitalist Andrew Badolato, who has been involved in films produced and directed by Bannon.[31][32]
Personal life
Bannon married Mary Louise Piccard, his second wife, in April 1995. Their twin daughters were born three days later. Bannon was charged with misdemeanor domestic violence, battery and dissuading a witness in early January 1996, after Piccard accused Bannon of domestic abuse. The charges were later dropped when his now ex-wife did not show up to court.[33] During divorce proceedings, Piccard also claimed that Bannon had made antisemiticremarks about choice of schools, saying that he did not want to send his children to The Archer School for Girls because Jews raise their children to be “whiny brats”. Bannon’s spokesperson denied the accusation, noting that he had chosen to send both his children to the Archer School.[34][35][36][37][38] Bannon’s association with the alt-right movement along with his aforementioned alleged anti-Semitic remarks about choices of schools, have contributed to accusations of white nationalism from the Southern Poverty Law Center and other advocacy groups, commentators, and Senator Harry Reid.[39][40][41][42]
The Pronk Pops blog is the broadcasting and mass communication of ideas about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, prosperity, truth, virtue and wisdom.
.jpg)
.png){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
_-_ribbon_bar.png){kind=small}
_-_ribbon_bar.png){kind=small}
_BAR.png){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
_2012_in_Nashville,_TN.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Pronk Pops 
The Pronk Pops Show 804, November 30, 2016, Story 1: Trump Efforts Save American Jobs At Carrier — Good Optics and Great Speech — Does Not Address Out-of-Control Federal Government Spending And The Impact on Economic Growth and Job Creation — Videos — Story 2: U.S. Border Patrol Agents Assaults Up 200% From Last Year — Will Trump Rollback The 30-50 Million Illegal Aliens Invasion of The United States or Give 95% Plus Of The Illegal Aliens Citizenship? — Trump Will Give Them Citizenship — Touch Back Amnesty! — All The Illegal Aliens In The United States Are Criminal Illegal Aliens Mr. Trump! — Once This Happens — His Supporters Will Abandon Republican Party and Dump Trump! — Videos
Posted on November 30, 2016. Filed under: American History, Budgetary Policy, Countries, Crime, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Drugs, Economics, Education, Elections, Employment, Foreign Policy, Free Trade, Gangs, Government Spending, History, Human, Illegal Drugs, Illegal Immigration, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Independence, Labor Economics, Law, Legal Drugs, Legal Immigration, Life, Media, News, Obama, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, Pro Life, Progressives, Radio, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Scandals, Tax Policy, Taxation, Taxes, Unemployment, United States of America, Videos, Violence, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: 30 November 2016, 30-50 Million Illegal Alien Invasion of The United States, America, Amnesty, Articles, Audio, Breaking News, Broadcasting, Capitalism, Carrier, Cartoons, Charity, Citizenship, Citizenship for Illegal Aliens, Clarity, Classical Liberalism, Collectivism, Commentary, Commitment, Communicate, Communication, Concise, Convincing, Courage, Criminal Illegal Aliens, Culture, Current Affairs, Current Events, Donald J. Trump, Economic Growth, Economic Policy, Economics, Education, Enforce All Immigration Laws, Evil, Experience, Faith, Family, Federal Spending Out of Control, First, Fiscal Policy, Free Enterprise, Freedom, Freedom of Speech, Friends, Give It A Listen!, God, Good, Goodwill, Growth, Hope, Illegal Aliens, Individualism, Job Creation, Jobs Saved, Knowledge, Laurence Kotlikoff, Liberty, Life, Love, Lovers of Liberty, Mike Pence, Monetary Policy, MPEG3, National Debt, News, Opinions, Peace, Photos, Podcasts, Political Philosophy, Politics, Prosperity, Radio, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Representative Republic, Republic, Resources, Respect, Rule of Law, Rule of Men, Show Notes, Steve Bannon, Talk Radio, The Pronk Pops Show, The Pronk Pops Show 804, Touch Back Amnesty, Touchback Immigration, Trump Saves Jobs at Carrier, Truth, Tyranny, U.S. Constitution, United States of America, United Technologies, Videos, Virtue, War, Wisdom |
The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts
Pronk Pops Show 804: November 30, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 803: November 29, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 802: November 28, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 801: November 22, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 800: November 21, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 799: November 18, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 798: November 17, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 797: November 16, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 796: November 15, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 795: November 14, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 794: November 10, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 793: November 9, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 792: November 8, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 791: November 7, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 790: November 4, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 789: November 3, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 788: November 2, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 787: October 31, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 786: October 28, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 785: October 27, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 784: October 26, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 783: October 25, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 782: October 24, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 781: October 21, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 780: October 20, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 779: October 19, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 778: October 18, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 777: October 17, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 776: October 14, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 775: October 13, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 774: October 12, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 773: October 11, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 772: October 10, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 771: October 7, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 770: October 6, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 769: October 5, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 768: October 3, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 767: September 30, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 766: September 29, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 765: September 28, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 764: September 27, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 763: September 26, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 762: September 23, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 761: September 22, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 760: September 21, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 759: September 20, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 758: September 19, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 757: September 16, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 756: September 15, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 755: September 14, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 754: September 13, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 753: September 12, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 752: September 9, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 751: September 8, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 750: September 7, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 749: September 2, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 748: September 1, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 747: August 31, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 746: August 30, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 745: August 29, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 744: August 26, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 743: August 25, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 742: August 24, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 741: August 23, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 740: August 22, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 739: August 18, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 738: August 17, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 737: August 16, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 736: August 15, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 735: August 12, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 734: August 11, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 733: August 9, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 732: August 8, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 731: August 4, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 730: August 3, 2016
Pronk Pops Show 729: August 1, 2016
Story 1: Trump Efforts Save American Jobs At Carrier — Good Optics and Great Speech — Does Not Address Out-of-Control Federal Government Spending And The Impact on Economic Growth and Job Creation — Videos
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
~ Ghandi
Big win for Donald Trump
MUST WATCH: First MAJOR Donald Trump Speech Since Winning Election – Carrier Victory Lap in Indiana
The Untruth About Steve Bannon | Donald Trump’s Chief Strategist
Best Steve Bannon Speech
BU Econ. Professor Kotlikoff: America is Bankrupt
Rhett Talks – Is the United States Bankrupt?
LISTEN to THIS.. TRUMP is RIGHT on US DEBT. (Pre-General election)
US hides real debt, in worse shape than Greece’
The US national debt is twenty times higher than is officially reported, approaching $222 trillion, and today’s children could soon be paying their parent’s debts, reputed American economist Laurence Kotlikoff told RT. TRANSCRIPT of the interview: http://on.rt.com/81u1ac
FairTax: Fire Up Our Economic Engine (Official HD)
Freedom from the IRS! – FairTax Explained in Detail
Deficits, Debts and Unfunded Liabilities: The Consequences of Excessive Government Spending
Huge budget deficits and record levels of national debt are getting a lot of attention, but this video explains that unfunded liabilities for entitlement programs are Americas real red-ink challenge. More important, this CF&P mini-documentary reveals that deficits and debt are symptoms of the real problem of an excessive burden of government spending. http://www.freedomandprosperity.org
Monetary and Fiscal Policy: Crash Course Government and Politics #48
Social Policy: Crash Course Government and Politics #49
Fiscal Policy and Stimulus: Crash Course Economics #8
Deficits & Debts: Crash Course Economics #9
Laurence Kotlikoff-U S Treasury Bonds One of the Riskiest Securities in the World
US Unfunded Liabilities
III – Unfunded Liabilities
Dr. Laurence Kotlikoff giving advice on Social Security
Full Speech: Donald Trump, Mike Pence Carrier Plant Announcement 12/1/2016 Trump Indianapolis Speech
Carrier says it has deal with Trump to keep jobs in Indiana
Air conditioning company Carrier said Tuesday that it had reached an agreement with President-elect Donald Trump that would keep 1,000 jobs in Indianapolis.
Trump and Vice President-elect Mike Pence, Indiana’s outgoing governor, planned to travel to the state Thursday to unveil the agreement alongside company officials.
Details of the agreement were not immediately available. A Trump transition source told Fox News that Carrier executives went to Trump Tower Tuesday to hash out the deal.
Trump spent much of his campaign pledging to keep companies like Carrier from moving jobs overseas. His focus on manufacturing jobs contributed to his unexpected appeal with working-class voters in states like Michigan, which has long voted for Democrats in presidential elections.
In a September debate against Democratic rival Hillary Clinton, he railed against Carrier’s decision to move hundreds of air-conditioner manufacturing jobs from Indianapolis to Mexico.
“So many hundreds and hundreds of companies are doing this,” Trump said. “We have to stop our jobs from being stolen from us. We have to stop our companies from leaving the United States.”
In February, Carrier said it would shutter its Indianapolis plant employing 1,400 workers and move its manufacturing to Mexico.
The plant’s workers would have been laid off over three years starting in 2017.
United Technologies Electronic Controls also announced then that it planned to move its Huntington manufacturing operations to a new plant in Mexico, costing the northeastern Indiana city 700 jobs by 2018. Those workers make microprocessor-based controls for the HVAC and refrigeration industries.
Obama Admin Reacts To Pres-Elect Trump’s Deal With Carrier To Keep Jobs In Indiana – Cavuto
Trump Saves Some, But Not All, Carrier Jobs
Obama: Some jobs ‘are just not going to come back’
Trump, Pence Saved nearly 1,000 jobs from moving to Mexico
Carrier employee thanks President-elect Trump
Trump Saves American Factory…For A Price
Trump Convinces Carrier To Keep 1,000 Jobs In America
Megyn Kelly Panel Debates Trump Tactic Used to Save Carrier Jobs – 11/30/16
Trump proposes 35% tax for imported products from Mexico
Trump promises to save Carrier jobs
Presidential candidate threatens 35% tax on Carrier’s products
Carrier Employee Mark Weddle, longtime democrat, “Voting For Trump”
Is Free Trade Destroying US Jobs? Demagoguery vs. Data
The Legacy of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act
The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act was a grave error for U.S. trade policy. As the United States slid into depression, the act represented a desperation move by Congress and President Hoover. Since then, presidents have regarded free trade as the rule rather than the exception. Economist Douglas A. irwin discusses the Smoot-Hawley Act and its legacy.
Milton Friedman on the Dangers of Protectionism (Obama’s recent tariff on Chinese imports)
Milton Friedman – Free Trade Vs Protectionism
Milton Friedman – Free Trade (Q&A) Part 1
Milton Friedman – Free Trade (Q&A) Part 2
Trump nominees map out plans for tax cuts, trade and Carrier-style negotiations
Employees walk in the Carrier plant parking lot on Wednesday in Indianapolis. Donald Trump persuaded the air-conditioning manufacturer not to move up to 1,000 jobs from Indiana to Mexico. (Darron Cummings/AP)
President-elect Donald Trump’s nascent administration on Wednesday began outlining the contours of its strategy for jump-starting the nation’s economy, including how it would overhaul the tax code, rethink trade agreements and directly negotiate with major corporations.
Treasury secretary nominee Steven Mnuchin rejected claims that Trump’s tax program would benefit mainly the wealthy, instead highlighting plans for a child-care tax credit and a middle-class tax cut.
“There will be no absolute tax cut for the upper class,” he said on CNBC. “There will be a big tax cut for the middle class.”
Trump’s strategy secured an early victory this week when the president-elect persuaded air-conditioning manufacturer Carrier not to move up to 1,000 jobs from Indiana to Mexico. The negotiation was an unusual move for a modern president, but Mnuchin suggested such direct intervention would be an important tool under the new administration.
“It starts with an attitude of this administration,” Mnuchin said Wednesday on CNBC. “This president, this vice president-elect is going to have open communications with business leaders.”
Mnuchin and Trump’s pick for commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, also called for moving away from the broad multinational free trade agreements that have shaped the global economy over the past generation in favor of bilateral deals. But they stopped short of embracing the president-elect’s most heated election rhetoric, calling for double-digit tariffs on imports from China and Mexico.
Turning Trump’s sweeping campaign promises into reality could prove a daunting challenge for his newly named economics team, which includes Todd Ricketts, co-owner of the Chicago Cubs, as deputy commerce secretary. Trump’s proposals are both expansive and aggressive, starting with a pledge to create 25 million jobs and push growth to 4 percent annually.
Many economists have questioned whether that is even possible in the face of an aging workforce and slower growth in productivity. In addition, rewriting the tax code would be a mammoth undertaking that has eluded Republican lawmakers since the 1980s, and independent analysts cast doubt on whether Trump can make the numbers add up.
On Wednesday, Trump’s new economic team said that overhauling taxes — particularly cutting the corporate tax rate — would create incentives for businesses to invest and hire more workers, eventually resulting in higher tax revenue. But an analysis by the independent Tax Foundation estimated that Trump’s plan would cost at least $2.6 trillion over the next decade, even after accounting for stronger growth.
Mnuchin and Ross reiterated the administration’s commitment to cutting taxes for the middle class, but that remains a key difference between the president-elect’s campaign plan and the tax blueprint put forth by GOP leaders on Capitol Hill.
The congressional plan, like Trump’s, would cut taxes for the wealthy and for corporations, but it would not do nearly as much as Trump would to cut taxes for lower- and middle-income Americans.
Reconciling the two will be a major sticking point in any tax-reform negotiations next year, although House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) praised Trump’s nominees on Wednesday.
“I am excited to get to work with this strong team to fix our broken tax code, ease the regulatory burden on American businesses, and grow our economy,” he said.
Mnuchin also pushed back against analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center that found the bulk of the benefits under Trump’s plan would go to wealthy households, while some single-parent households would end up paying higher taxes.
“We’re going to have the most significant middle-income tax cut since Reagan,” he told reporters.
Business groups welcomed the focus on tax cuts and praised Trump’s nomination of Cabinet officials with industry backgrounds.
“They understand that modernizing our outdated, anticompetitive tax system will be the most effective way to produce the economic growth that puts more people to work in good jobs,” said John Engler, president of the Business Roundtable.
On trade, Mnuchin and Ross sounded a somewhat softer note than Trump did on the campaign trail. During the election, Trump called China the world’s “single greatest currency manipulator.” But on Wednesday, his top economic advisers demurred when asked whether they would take formal action against the country.
“If we determine that we need to label them as a currency manipulator, that’s something the Treasury would do,” Mnuchin said.
And though they expressed disapproval of sweeping multinational trade agreements in favor of bilateral deals with other countries, they backed away from threats to impose double-digit tariffs on imports from Mexico and China.
“Everybody talks about tariffs as the first things. Tariffs are the last thing. Tariffs are a part of the negotiation,” Ross said on CNBC. “The real trick is going to be increase American exports.”
Trump’s efforts to keep Carrier in Indiana underscore both the potential benefits and pitfalls of his hands-on approach. Under the agreement, the company will receive tax incentives from the state economic development corporation to keep about 1,000 jobs in the state, said John Mutz, a member of the agency’s board and the former lieutenant governor of Indiana.
“The dynamics of the situation changed,” Mutz said.
Mutz said he had not reviewed the final terms of the agreement and could not provide details about how much money the company would receive or over what period. If the agreement is only for a few years, Trump’s efforts might give workers only a temporary reprieve.
Experts said custom deals such as the one struck with Carrier could create a haphazard system in which the government winds up picking corporate winners and losers, said Timothy Bartik, an economist at the nonpartisan W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. Instead, he said, governments should focus on providing training for workers and investing in research and development to encourage businesses to invest and grow.
Economy & Business Alerts
Breaking news about economic and business issues.
“The trouble with striking just individual deals is that means that some people are subject to different rules,” Bartik said. “If you think of things as deals, who gets the deals? Does it become a system of favoritism?”
Although the agreement was celebrated as a win in the United States, officials in Mexico faced growing uncertainty.
Carrier had already begun building a new factory in the outskirts of the city of Monterrey, although company officials would not say whether any of the 2,000 employees originally projected to staff it had been hired. Paulo Carreño, a deputy foreign minister in charge of North American relations, said that every company on both sides of the border “has full liberty to decide where to put their own business.”
“What we have created with the U.S. and Canada is we not only buy and sell things with one another, we build things together,” he said. “We need to not only keep this relationship but to deepen it.”
Jim Tankersley and Josh Partlow contributed to this report.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/trump-nominees-map-out-plans-for-tax-cuts-trade-and-carrier-style-negotiations/2016/11/30/54cfca98-b73d-11e6-a677-b608fbb3aaf6_story.html?utm_term=.cfc179957e7c
Indiana Gives $7 Million in Tax Breaks to Keep Carrier Jobs
The move will keep about 1,000 jobs in the state; Trump says companies won’t leave the U.S. ‘without consequences’
By TED MANN Updated Dec. 1, 2016 3:26 p.m. ET
Indiana officials agreed to give United Technologies Corp. $7 million worth of tax breaks over 10 years to encourage the company’s Carrier Corp. unit to keep about 1,000 jobs in the state, according to people familiar with the matter, a deal struck after intense criticism of Carrier by President-elect Donald Trump on the campaign trail.
The heating and air conditioning company will invest about $16 million to keep its operations in the state, including a furnace plant in Indianapolis that it had previously planned to close and shift the work to Mexico, the people said.
Mr. Trump, who toured the Carrier plant in Indianapolis Thursday with Vice President-elect Mike Pence, said companies aren’t going to leave the U.S. “anymore without consequences.”
After publicly shaming Carrier Corp. throughout the presidential campaign, Donald Trump announced a deal on Thursday with the company’s parent to keep 1,000 jobs in Indiana in exchange for state tax breaks. Is this model repeatable with other companies? WSJ’s Jason Bellini has #TheShortAnswer. Photo: Getty
The deal would cover 800 Carrier workers from the Indianapolis furnace plant and an additional 300 research and headquarters positions that weren’t slated to go to Mexico, according to another person briefed on the deal.
The company still plans to move 600 jobs from the Carrier plant to Mexico. It also will proceed with plans to close a second plant in Huntington, Ind., that makes electronic controls, moving 700 other jobs to Mexico.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/indiana-gives-7-million-in-tax-breaks-to-keep-carrier-jobs-1480608461
Carrier has previously said it expected to save about $65 million a year by shutting the plant and shifting its operations to Monterrey, in the state of Nuevo León, where wages average about $11 a day, plus benefits. The average wage of the Indiana jobs that will be retained is $30 an hour, according to a document reviewed by the Journal.
Mr. Trump has played up the partial rescue as a sign he can deliver on campaign promises. Through the presidential primary and general election, the Republican businessman had made an example of Carrier, at one point threatening to put a 35% tariff on Carrier imports unless it reversed its decision to move the jobs to Mexico.
“This is a big win for the incoming administration but an even bigger win for the people of Indiana,” transition spokesmanJason Miller said Thursday. The transition team has declined to provide details about the cost of keeping those jobs in the state.
Mr. Trump also will host an evening rally at U.S. Bank Arena in Cincinnati, a Republican stronghold. Ohio was one of six states the Republican captured after being won twice by Democratic President Barack Obama. That is the start of a broader “thank you” tour that is expected to include stops in Florida and across the Midwest.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, who during his presidential campaign had also attacked Carrier and other firms shifting work abroad, criticized the deal on Thursday, saying Mr. Trump failed to make good on his campaign pledge to save all of the jobs from moving to Mexico.
The deal also creates a bad precedent, Mr. Sanders contended, writing that Mr. Trump “has signaled to every corporation in America that they can threaten to offshore jobs in exchange for business-friendly tax benefits and incentives.”
“I’m pretty happy that we’re keeping jobs in America, aren’t you?” House Speaker Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) said Thursday. He said he didn’t know the details of the agreement, but that governors’ responsibilities include working to keep jobs in their states. “Mike Pence is still the sitting governor of Indiana. This is what governors do,” said Mr. Ryan.
The deal that emerged from weeks of negotiations between United Technologies brass and officials in the Trump camp led by Mr. Pence, the Indiana governor, is a relatively standard package of state incentives, according to people familiar with the agreement.
On Wednesday, Carrier said “incentives offered by the state were an important consideration,” without providing further details.
“This agreement in no way diminishes our belief in the benefits of free trade and that the forces of globalization will continue to require solutions for the long-term competitiveness of the U.S. and of American workers moving forward,” the company said.
In addition to Carrier, United Technologies makes Pratt & Whitney jet engines and Otis elevators. It employs about 200,000 people, about one third of them in the U.S.
People familiar with the negotiations said the company and Mr. Pence’s team also discussed a wide range of priorities, including United Technologies’ interest in a corporate tax overhaul, and regulations the company feels have been a burden to its business.
The federal government is also an important customer. The U.S. military accounts for about 10% of United Technologies’ $56 billion in annual sales, for products like the engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Finance Committee, said he would be asking more about the Carrier deal and said he would inquire whether there were promises about defense contracts.
“I want to know whether the president-elect promised special federal tax breaks for a single company,” Mr. Wyden said Thursday. “I want to do everything I can to keep jobs in the United States, but there are some questions here.”
For Mr. Trump, the trips to Indiana and Ohio meant there were no announced meetings on Thursday with prospective cabinet members. Those meetings will resume on Friday in New York, where Mr. Trump is scheduled to visit with Sen. David Perdue (R., Ga.), retired Adm. Jay Cohen, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton, and Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D., N.D.).
—Michael C. Bender and Richard Rubin contributed to this article.
Deal for Carrier to Keep U.S. Plant Open May Hinge on Tax Overhaul
Talks include the conglomerate’s plans to shift more than 2,000 jobs from Indiana to Mexico
Nov. 27, 2016 6:32 p.m. ET
President-elect Donald Trump’s campaign pledge to save jobs at a Carrier plant in Indiana was framed around free trade, but negotiations about corporate tax law changes could be just as important to any possible deal.
Representatives for the incoming administration, including Vice President-elect Mike Pence, have held wide-ranging policy talks with top-ranking executives at Carrier’s parent company, United Technologies Corp., said a person familiar with the discussions.
The discussions include the conglomerate’s plans to shift more than 2,000 jobs from Indiana to Mexico, but have covered other issues, including the company’s wishes for a tax overhaul that Mr. Trump and Republicans have promised to pursue early in his administration, this person said.
United Technologies CEO Gregory Hayes has pledged to work with the new administration despite Mr. Trump’s attacks on the planned Carrier plant closure during his campaign. It wasn’t clear what role Mr. Trump himself has played in the discussions, though he said in a tweet on Thanksgivng he was working on the matter.
A spokeswoman for Mr. Trump didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
The incoming president’s goal is to show that he can keep some of his boldest campaign promises, and the CEO needs to keep peace with the federal government, a critical customer for products like its jet fighter engines. Military sales account for roughly 10% of the company’s $56 billion annual total, the company says.
United Technologies, like other globalized U.S. companies, also has large reserves of cash overseas—profits that corporations are waiting to repatriate to the U.S. until Congress cuts the level of tax they would pay. The company reported that 85% of its total cash, or more than $6 billion, was overseas, as of the end of 2015.
One idea backed by House Republicans but not Mr. Trump would be to create a two-tiered tax rate that would help companies that have used foreign profits for factories and other assets they can’t easily repatriate.
Large U.S. companies also want a lower corporate tax rate.
Given the variables of the company’s interests and the three-year window over which United Technologies planned to stagger the job cuts in Indiana, there is the potential for a deal, the person familiar with the discussions said.
RELATED
In April, at a rally near Carrier’s Indianapolis plant, Mr. Trump pledged to impose a 35% tariff on air conditioning units the company built in Mexico for sale in the U.S.
Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders said Saturday that Mr. Trump must make it clear that if United Technologies “wants to receive another defense contract from the taxpayers of this country, it must not move these plants to Mexico.”
Though only a portion of overall sales at United Technologies—which makes Pratt & Whitney jet engines, Otis elevators and an array of building equipment—defense is a key focus of the conglomerate. The company is the sole provider of jet engines for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
Carrier said on Thanksgiving Day that it didn’t have any changes to announce, roughly an hour after Mr. Trump tweeted that he was “making progress” in convincing the company to keep the jobs in Indiana.
In Indianapolis, Mr. Trump’s message engendered only muted optimism.
“For us, we pretty much think it’s a done deal that they’re moving, and don’t think he can do anything to change that, although we don’t want to give up hope,” said Kelly Ray Hugunin,business representative for United Steelworkers Local 1999, which represents 1,400 workers at a Carrier plant that makes residential furnace equipment.
The union hasn’t received any word from the company or the Trump administration about any talks to prevent jobs moving to Mexico, said the union local’s president, Chuck Jones.
“If Trump’s got a trump card to play on this,” Mr. Jones said Saturday, “even though Carrier’s saving $65 million a year [by closing the plants], it’s that he would try to leverage some of the billions of dollars that United Technologies has on military contracts.”
—Richard Rubin contributed to this article.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/deal-for-carrier-to-keep-u-s-plant-open-may-hinge-on-tax-overhaul-1480289575
FLASHBACK: OBAMA MOCKS TRUMP FOR PROMISING TO KEEP CARRIER PLANT IN U.S.
June, President Obama participated in a PBS townhall and was asked about Trump’s promise to keep Carrier’s Indiana plant in the U.S. The townhall participant, a member of the Steelworkers Union employed by Carrier, asked Obama if anything could be done to stem the tide of jobs flowing out of the country, as Trump had recently promised to do.
“Those jobs of the past are just not going to come back,” Obama told the employee.
Instead, Obama advised workers losing their jobs to learn how to adapt their skills to “some of these new technologies,” in particular the “clean energy sector.”
“Let’s focus on those,” he suggested.
Obama also singled out Trump for derision, saying:
When somebody says, like the person you just mentioned who I’m not going to advertise for, that he’s going to bring all these jobs back, well how exactly are you going to do that? What are you going to do? There’s — there’s no answer to it. He just says, “Well, I’m going to negotiate a better deal.” Well, how — what — how exactly are you going to negotiate that? What magic wand do you have? And usually, the answer is he doesn’t have an answer.
On Wednesday, the White House downplayed Carrier’s decision to remain in the U.S.
U.S. has lost 5 million manufacturing jobs since 2000
by Heather Long
Donald Trump claims trade with Mexico and China is killing America’s middle class. Corporate America says that’s false.
“History shows that trade made easy, affordable and fast…always begets more trade, more jobs, more prosperity,” the founder and CEO of FedEx wrote in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed.
Who’s right? Take a look at what has happened to blue-collar workers.
Manufacturing jobs in the U.S. actually increased in the years after the North America Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada went into effect in 1994.
But the story changed dramatically in 2000. Since then, the U.S. has shed 5 million manufacturing jobs, a fact opponents of free trade mention often.
Over 12 million Americans still work in manufacturing
Trump and Bernie Sanders blame China for undercutting American workers with cheap labor (even Trump makes a lot of his suits and ties overseas). But there’s another big factor: technology. Robots and machines are also replacing workers. The tech trend would have happened regardless of trade.
Still, manufacturing remains a key part of the U.S. economy. Over 12.3 million Americans are employed in the industry. But it’s not the powerhouse it was.
Related: Americans fear a life of ‘dead-end crap jobs with crap wages’
In 1960, about one in four American workers had a job in manufacturing. Today fewer than one in 10 are employed in the sector, according to government data.
Call it the Great Shift. Workers transitioned from the fields to the factories. Now they are moving from factories to service counters and health care centers. The fastest growing jobs in America now are nurses, personal care aides, cooks, waiters, retail salespersons and operations managers.
Trump’s trade talk is ‘bluster’
Trade likely sped up the shift, but many experts say it was inevitable. It’s unlikely many manufacturing jobs will ever return, even if Trump’s walls get built.
“Trump’s talk on trade is bluster,” says economist Charles Ballard of Michigan State University. “Even if you did [what Trump says], you wouldn’t reverse the technology, which is a very big part of the picture.”
Trump’s threat to put hefty taxes on Chinese and Mexican goods coming into the country would likely to sink the economy into a recession. It would make many items at the store more expensive for working class Americans and spark a global trade war.
The U.S. tried this tactic in the 1930s with a law known as Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act. It backfired, pulling the U.S. further into the Great Depression.
Related: Why Americans are so angry in 2016
Many manufacturing jobs are lower middle class
The deeper question is whether the 5 million manufacturing positions that have been lost were truly that great. To put it another way, were the jobs lost really better than the jobs that have replaced them?
Since the 1960s, manufacturing has always paid substantially more than the minimum wage. Even today, the manufacturing jobs that remain average $20.17 an hour. That’s nearly three times the federal minimum wage.
It’s enough to vault a worker solidly into the lower middle class, although he or she still would earn less than the true middle — $53,657 a year.
Mention “blue collar,” and most Americans visualize an auto worker. Someone who is middle class with a good salary and benefits despite not having a college degree.
But the reality is manufacturing in America is (and always has) included a wide variety of positions. They range from clothing workers who make less than $25,000 a year on average to supervisors and plant operators who typically make almost $60,000 a year.
Related: Workplace accidents led to nearly 3,000 amputations in 2015
Unemployment in the U.S. is low again because people have found work despite the manufacturing jobs disappearing.
The jobs former manufacturing workers have moved into — health care, construction and retail — also vary greatly in pay, benefits and quality.
“Certain industries have declined and others have risen,” says Harvard professor and trade expert Robert Lawrence. “In aggregate, the economy is close to full employment.”
–CNNMoney’s Patrick Gillespie contributed to this report.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/29/news/economy/us-manufacturing-jobs/
Story 2: U.S. Border Patrol Agents Assaults Up 200% From Last Year — Will Trump Rollback The 30-50 Million Illegal Aliens Invasion of The United States or Give 95% Plus Of The Illegal Aliens Citizenship? — Trump Will Give Them Citizenship — Touch Back Amnesty! — All The Illegal Aliens In The United States Are Criminal Illegal Aliens Mr. Trump! — Once This Happens — His Supporters Will Abandon Republican Party and Dump Trump! — Videos
“You can fool all the people some of the time, and
some of the people all the time,
but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Donald Trump’s Immigration Plan – Deport and then Mass Expedited Amnesty
Trump’s Touchback amnesty explained by Marc Thiessen
Rep Steve King discusses Trump’s touchback amnesty
‘Amnesty Trump’?: McCain Warns Donald of Softening Immigration Stance
How Donald Trump’s Amnesty Plan Works
The Illegal Invasion of America
Trump’s first 100 days: Immigration
Donald Trump’s entire immigration speech
How to solve the illegal immigration problem
Donald Trump explains his immigration plan
Heritage In Focus: Cost of Low-Skilled Immigrants
Robert Rector – Welfare Use by Legal and Illegal Immigrants
Stop Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants – Expert Reveals the True Cost of Amnesty
Immigration by the Numbers — Off the Charts
Immigration Gumballs and White Genocide Best explanation ever
How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the US? – Walsh – 1
How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the United States? Presentation by James H. Walsh, Associate General Counsel of the former INS – part 1.
Census Bureau estimates of the number of illegals in the U.S. are suspect and may represent significant undercounts. The studies presented by these authors show that the numbers of illegal aliens in the U.S. could range from 20 to 38 million.
On October 3, 2007, a press conference and panel discussion was hosted by Californians for Population Stabilization (http://www.CAPSweb.org) and The Social Contract (http://www.TheSocialContract.com) to discuss alternative methodologies for estimating the true numbers of illegal aliens residing in the United States.
This is a presentation of five panelists presenting at the National Press Club, Washington, D.C. on October 3, 2007. The presentations are broken into a series of video segments:
Wayne Lutton, Introduction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5KHQR…
Diana Hull, part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6WvFW…
Diana Hull, part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYuRNY…
James H Walsh, part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MB0RkV…
James H. Walsh, part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbmdun…
Phil Romero: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_ohvJ…
Fred Elbel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNTJGf…
How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the US? – Walsh – 2
U.S. Border Patrol Chief: Assaults On U.S. Border Patrol Agents Up 200% From Last Year
On Wednesday, U.S. Border Patrol Chief Mark Morgan testified in front of the Senate Homeland Security Committee regarding the conditions on the southern border with Mexico.
During Morgan’s opening statement, he painted an unpleasant picture of what U.S. Border Patrol agents face every day.
“One thing was consistent and abundantly clear. The men and women of the U.S. Border Patrol have one of the toughest jobs in federal law enforcement,” Morgan said during the hearing.
“They are the most assaulted federal law enforcement in the United States, more than 7,400 border patrol agents have been assaulted since 2006,” Morgan told the committee. “That rose in FY16 by 20 percent, and year-to-date, we are seeing an increase in assaults of 200 percent from the previous year-to-date. It’s a dangerous job.”
http://ntknetwork.com/u-s-border-patrol-chief-assaults-on-u-s-border-patrol-agents-up-200-from-last-year/
Former FBI U.S. Border Patrol Chief ” I have a lot learn”
Risk Takers – 109 – Border Patrol Agents
LOOKOUT ILLEGALS! TRUMP’S DEPORTATION FORCE PLAN ALIVE AGAIN!
Fence Not Needed At Parts Of Mexico Border | MSNBC
Border Patrol Agent Who Catches Up To 500 Illegals A Day Says “They Want To Get Caught”
Border Patrol sounds the alarm! Look what’s happening!
Armed groups take US border patrol into their own hands
Border Patrol Listens To Trump, Not Obama
Reporter Runs Into Hundreds Of Illegal Immigrants Crossing The U.S Mexico Border
US-MEXICO Border: After Trump Win, Mexico Issues Statement on Trump Wall as if They’re Pleading.
Mexican Cement Company Offers to Help Trump Build Wall
The Truth About Illegal Immigrants: Was Donald Trump Right?
EXCLUSIVE — Immigration Officer: Border Deluge of Illegal Aliens ‘Is The Worst We’ve Ever Seen’
The flood of illegal aliens pouring across the southern border has become a “crisis situation” and is even worse than the record 2014 border surge, says an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer from El Paso, Texas with more than ten years of service to the agency.
by JULIA HAHN
The ICE agency has no room to house the arriving surge, so many illegals are being released into American communities where they disappear “into the wind never to be seen by us again,” the agent said.
The agent—who spoke to Breitbart News exclusively on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation by the administration—detailed how his overrun agency has been forced to pull agents from their mission of removing criminal aliens from the nation’s interior, so that they can help process the cross-border influx of illegal aliens.
The illegal aliens, mostly from Central America, are using President Barack Obama’s policies to request asylum, work permits and green cards. Whereas unlawful aliens traditionally sought to evade border agents in hopes of reaching U.S. cities where they could illegally fill American jobs, reports document how many of these new migrants are now turning themselves in to border patrol agents believing they’ll be allowed to stay permanently. This 2016 influx of migrants from Central America had exceeded 117,000 by Oct. 1, marking a new record, Breitbart News reported.
Many additional thousands of illegal aliens continue to pour across the border via smuggling routes that try to bypass the border patrol. In the 12 months up to October 2016, 271,000 illegal immigrants were caught trying to sneak across the border—but many others escaped arrest and made their way to U.S. workplaces and cities.
ICE is the agency responsible for enforcing federal immigration law by identifying and removing illegal aliens within the interior of the nation, as well as removing aliens apprehended at the border by border patrol. After an alien is apprehended by border patrol, the alien is then turned over to ICE, which processes and detains the alien.
Although the surge has been largely ignored by corporate media and unacknowledged by the administration, “the public’s safe is in jeopardy,” the agent warned. Migrants with histories of prior criminal offenses, plus “would-be perpetrators or terrorists whose intent is to harm Americans or our country as a whole” could be among those being released from ICE’s custody, the agent said.
The officer said he believes the reason corporate media refuse to cover the crisis is because “it’s an election year and [the media] have a politically-driven agenda. I don’t know why else it wouldn’t be covered—this is the worst we’ve ever seen it,” the agent said:
“The safety of the American public is at risk,” the officer warned.
“In my book, if we miss one criminal alien who goes not to victimize one American citizen, that’s one too many,” the agent said. “But with the scale we’re talking about here, it’s likely lots of criminal aliens will to be able to slip through the system. So many Americans could potentially be affected by this.”
However, the agent’s view does not seem to be shared by many lawmakers. For instance, both Tim Kaine and Hillary Clinton have shunned the American victims of illegal alien crime. Similarly, Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan, who last year voted to grant federal funding to Sanctuary Cities, literally fled from grieving mothers, who were forced to bury their children as a result of open borders, as they sought to give him a letter begging him to enforce the nation’s immigration laws.
“There are lots of aliens we should be removing, but we can’t do it because we’re handcuffed by policies,” the agent explained. “The surge is worse than it was in 2014. Our southern border is not secure. It’s so porous. We have people working seven days a week just meet the demand and workload that’s being created by this administration’s policies.”
“The administration’s policies have created the influx and the crisis situation because people overrun our border knowing they have a chance to stay,” the officer said. “The workload, the number of people, we’ve had to deal with has by far surpassed any amount we’ve ever had to handle before.
“The Office of Refugee Resettlement is at capacity. The continued influx is going to put us way over capacity,” the officer explained. “Once they’re processed, we have to either find placement for them or release them, and right now we don’t have any place to put them… If we have nowhere to house them, they’re going to be released into the public—hundreds of bodies will be released.”
The officer continued:
“And mind you,” the officer added, “that figure is just the number of people that come over as a family unit—this doesn’t include the unaccompanied children or illegal adults who cross the border.”
This is significant because Hillary Clinton has pledged to “end family detention and close private immigrant detention centers.”
“Hillary believes we should end family detention for parents and children who arrive at our border in desperate situations. We have alternatives to detention for those who pose no flight or public safety risk, such as supervised release,” reads Clinton’s campaign website.
The agent described such a proposal as “ridiculous” and dangerous—as her plan could enable criminal aliens to enter the country and victimize innocent Americans. “If we think we have a mass migration problem now, and she’s trying to propose something like that, it’s only going to further overrun our borders and our officers,” the agent said.
“Does she propose we just release them?” the agent asked. “It sounds like she wants to create just another avenue for criminal aliens to re-enter the country and commit more crimes, and victimize more people while they’re here… Her proposal seems pretty far-fetched and seems to lack any knowledge of what the real issues are… There have been many instances where the men that we’re processing, who arrive with their family unit, have some criminal offenses in their history—is she proposing that we not investigate that?”
In September, the National ICE Council, which represents the nation’s roughly 5,000 frontline ICE officers, agents, and personnel endorsed Donald Trump over Clinton and “urged all Americans, especially the millions of lawful immigrants living within our country, to support Donald J. Trump, and to protect American jobs, wages and lives.” The endorsement marked the ICE Council’s first-ever endorsement of any candidate for any elected office.
In a statement announcing the endorsement, the council’s president warned against Clinton’s “radical plan” of “total amnesty plus open borders” that “would result in the loss of innocent American lives, mass victimization and death for many attempting to immigrate to the United States, the total gutting of interior enforcement, the handcuffing of ICE officers, and uncontrollable flood of illegal immigrants across U.S. borders.” The ICE Council president warned that the agenda of non-enforcement, favored by Clinton, “results in the daily loss of life.”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/10/30/exclusive-immigration-officer-border-deluge-of-illegal-aliens-is-the-worst-weve-ever-seen/
The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 800-804
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 793-799
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 785-792
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 777-784
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 769-776
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 759-768
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 751-758
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 745-750
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 738-744
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 732-737
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 727-731
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 720-726
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or DownloadShows 713-719
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 705-712
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 695-704
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 685-694
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 675-684
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 668-674
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 660-667
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 651-659
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 644-650
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 637-643
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 629-636
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 617-628
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 608-616
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 599-607
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 590-598
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 585- 589
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 575-584
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 565-574
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 556-564
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 546-555
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 538-545
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 532-537
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 526-531
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 519-525
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 510-518
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 500-509
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 490-499
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 480-489
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 473-479
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 464-472
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 455-463
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 447-454
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 439-446
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 431-438
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 422-430
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 414-421
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 408-413
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 400-407
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 391-399
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 383-390
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 376-382
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 369-375
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 360-368
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 354-359
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 346-353
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 338-345
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 328-337
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 319-327
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 307-318
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 296-306
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 287-295
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 277-286
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 264-276
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 250-263
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 236-249
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 222-235
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 211-221
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 202-210
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 194-201
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 184-193
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 174-183
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 165-173
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 158-164
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows151-157
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 143-150
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 135-142
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 131-134
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 124-130
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 93
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 92
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 91
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )