The Pronk Pops Show 943, August 9, 2017, Story 1: Big Brother/Sister Alive and Well In Corporate America — An Inconvenient Truth — Google Group Think Diversity Coercion Cult — Firing James Damore Proves Points of Memo — Discrimination in Hiring and Promoting People Based on Gender, Race, Class and Ideology Instead of Achievement, Experience and Merit Leads To Class Action Lawsuits By Women — Make Google Prove The Truth Is A Falsehood — Google Will Settle The Lawsuits Quickly or Pay A Very Large Price — Public Relations Disaster Developing — Conservatives, Classical Liberals, Libertarians Individualists and Rationalists Need Not Apply — Switching From Google Search Engine To Microsoft Bing Search Engine — Videos

Posted on August 10, 2017. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Breaking News, College, Communications, Countries, Crime, Culture, Defense Spending, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Economics, Employment, Freedom of Speech, Government, Government Dependency, Government Spending, History, Human Behavior, Independence, Language, Law, News, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, Progressives, Radio, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Rule of Law, Scandals, Security, Spying, United States of America, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 943, August 9, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 942, August 8, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 941, August 7, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 940, August 3, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 939,  August 2, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 938, August 1, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 937, July 31, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 936, July 27, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 935, July 26, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 934, July 25, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 934, July 25, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 933, July 24, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 932, July 20, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 931, July 19, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 930, July 18, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 929, July 17, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 928, July 13, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 927, July 12, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 926, July 11, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 925, July 10, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 924, July 6, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 923, July 5, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 922, July 3, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 921, June 29, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 920, June 28, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 919, June 27, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 918, June 26, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 917, June 22, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 916, June 21, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 915, June 20, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 914, June 19, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 913, June 16, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 912, June 15, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 911, June 14, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 910, June 13, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 909, June 12, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 908, June 9, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 907, June 8, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 906, June 7, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 905, June 6, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 904, June 5, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 903, June 1, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 902, May 31, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 901, May 30, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 900, May 25, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 899, May 24, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 898, May 23, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 897, May 22, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 896, May 18, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 895, May 17, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 894, May 16, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 893, May 15, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 892, May 12, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 891, May 11, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 890, May 10, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 889, May 9, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 888, May 8, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 887, May 5, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 886, May 4, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 885, May 3, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 884, May 1, 2017

Image result for google firing of employee diversityImage result for george orwell quotes about truthImage result for cartoon google diversity cultImage result for diversity cartoonsImage result for cartoon google

Image result for cartoon google

Image result for george orwell quotes about truth

Image result for branco cartoons on google diversityImage result for google gulag

Image result for diversity cartoons

Story 1: Big Brother/Sister Alive and Well In Corporate America — An Inconvenient Truth — Google Group Think Diversity Coercion Cult — Firing James Damore Proves Points of Memo — Discrimination in Hiring and Promoting People Based on Gender, Race, Class and Ideology Instead of Achievement, Experience and Merit Leads To Class Action Lawsuits By Women — Make Google Prove The Truth Is A Falsehood — Google Will Settle The Lawsuits Quickly or Pay A Very Large Price — Public Relations Disaster Developing — Conservatives, Classical Liberals, Libertarians Individualists and Rationalists Need Not Apply — Switching From Google Search Engine To Microsoft Bing Search Engine — Videos

Ben Shapiro Gives BRILLIANT Analysis of Google Memo Controversy

Ben Shapiro Interviews Google Memo Guy James Damore

EXPOSED: Google’s Entirely Far Left Leadership! | Louder With Crowder

Gavin McInnes: Stop lying about Google “anti-diversity” memo

The Truth About the Google ‘Diversity’ Memo

Fired Engineer James Damore: I Feel Google Betrayed Me

2017/08/08: James Damore and his Google Memo on Diversity (complete)

Google fires employee behind gender gap memo

Google Employee James Damore, Author of Diversity Memo, is Fired

Former Google engineer fired for anti-diversity memo stands by his words

Google fires employee for “Anti-Diversity” wrong-think.

This LIBERAL Woman in Tech Salutes James Damore!

Google Diversity Memo Sparks Outrage | CNBC

Ex-Google employee reacts to memo on women in tech

The Ramifications of Google Firing James Demore

Google Head Of Diversity: Leaked Employee Memo About Gender ‘Incorrect’

CNN’s Brooke Baldwin Outright Lies About Google Memo; Mary Katharine Ham Pounces

Scott Adams tells you what he thinks about the Google ‘manifesto’ firing

Rush Limbaugh: Google Manifesto rips political correctness (08-07-2017)

Rush Limbaugh Podcast 8/8/17 | Google Manifesto Author Canned

We’ve Been Blacklisted!! 100% PROOF They Are After Conservatives!! This Must NOT Go Ignored!!!

Explosive Google employee memo: A timeline

Is Trump On The Brink? | The Ben Shapiro Show Ep. 356

The Corporate Fascists Are Here | The Ben Shapiro Show Ep. 357

Google: Free Speech and Expression Are Dead Thanks to Snowflake HR Department Thought Fascists

James Damore of Google Is An Idiot for Daring to Suggest Flaws in Diversity Tyranny

What Pisses Me Off About The Google “Anti-Diversity” Memo

Let’s Read And Examine James Damore’s Diversity Memo (Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber)

Google Fires James Damore, Confirming His Memo’s Point: The Case for a Tech First Amendment

Ben Shapiro: Google’s ideological echo chamber (audio from 08-07-2017)

The Cult of Diversity at the BBC

Thomas Sowell – The Reality Of Multiculturalism

The Least Diverse Place in America

Google Violates Labor Laws By Firing Memo Writing Employee

Full James Damore Memo — Uncensored Memo with Charts and 

Fake news site Gizmodo (previously owned by Gawker) published an edited James Damore memo. What were they hiding?

You can read the full memo with charts and citations below.

View story at Medium.com

Why I Was Fired by Google

James Damore says his good-faith effort to discuss differences between men and women in tech couldn’t be tolerated in company’s ‘ideological echo chamber’

Former Google software engineer James Damore.
Former Google software engineer James Damore. PHOTO: PETER DUKE

I was fired by Google this past Monday for a document that I wrote and circulated internally raising questions about cultural taboos and how they cloud our thinking about gender diversity at the company and in the wider tech sector. I suggested that at least some of the male-female disparity in tech could be attributed to biological differences (and, yes, I said that bias against women was a factor too). Google Chief Executive Sundar Pichai declared that portions of my statement violated the company’s code of conduct and “cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.”

My 10-page document set out what I considered a reasoned, well-researched, good-faith argument, but as I wrote, the viewpoint I was putting forward is generally suppressed at Google because of the company’s “ideological echo chamber.” My firing neatly confirms that point. How did Google, the company that hires the smartest people in the world, become so ideologically driven and intolerant of scientific debate and reasoned argument?

We all have moral preferences and beliefs about how the world is and should be. Having these views challenged can be painful, so we tend to avoid people with differing values and to associate with those who share our values. This self-segregation has become much more potent in recent decades. We are more mobile and can sort ourselves into different communities; we wait longer to find and choose just the right mate; and we spend much of our time in a digital world personalized to fit our views.

Echo chambers maintain themselves by creating a shared spirit and keeping discussion confined within certain limits. As Noam Chomsky once observed, “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.”

But echo chambers also have to guard against dissent and opposition. Whether it’s in our homes, online or in our workplaces, a consensus is maintained by shaming people into conformity or excommunicating them if they persist in violating taboos. Public shaming serves not only to display the virtue of those doing the shaming but also warns others that the same punishment awaits them if they don’t conform.

In my document, I committed heresy against the Google creed by stating that not all disparities between men and women that we see in the world are the result of discriminatory treatment. When I first circulated the document about a month ago to our diversity groups and individuals at Google, there was no outcry or charge of misogyny. I engaged in reasoned discussion with some of my peers on these issues, but mostly I was ignored.

Everything changed when the document went viral within the company and the wider tech world. Those most zealously committed to the diversity creed—that all differences in outcome are due to differential treatment and all people are inherently the same—could not let this public offense go unpunished. They sent angry emails to Google’s human-resources department and everyone up my management chain, demanding censorship, retaliation and atonement.

Upper management tried to placate this surge of outrage by shaming me and misrepresenting my document, but they couldn’t really do otherwise: The mob would have set upon anyone who openly agreed with me or even tolerated my views. When the whole episode finally became a giant media controversy, thanks to external leaks, Google had to solve the problem caused by my supposedly sexist, anti-diversity manifesto, and the whole company came under heated and sometimes threatening scrutiny.

It saddens me to leave Google and to see the company silence open and honest discussion. If Google continues to ignore the very real issues raised by its diversity policies and corporate culture, it will be walking blind into the future—unable to meet the needs of its remarkable employees and sure to disappoint its billions of users.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-i-was-fired-by-google-1502481290

Google has fired the employee who penned a controversial memo on women and tech

The author wrote, among other things, that females suffered from more “neuroticism.”

The search giant acts.

 

In a memo to employees, Google CEO Sundar Pichai said the employee who penned a controversial memo that claimed that women had biological issues that prevented them from being as successful as men in tech had violated its Code of Conduct, and that the post had crossed “the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.”

He added: “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.”

Pichai’s wording appears to indicate that the employee is likely be fired, which some inside and outside the company have been calling for. A Google spokesperson said the company would not confirm any firing of an individual employee, but in the past others have been let go for violating its Code of Conduct.

(Update: Sources told Recode that the employee has been fired, but Google said it would not comment on individual employees. The memo’s author also confirmed his firing from the company to Bloomberg.)

Once it does happen — and it should not be long — the move is sure to attract a firestorm of criticism on both sides, putting the search giant in the crosshairs of a wider debate about gender issues taking place in Silicon Valley and across the country.

The employee memo — which was up for days without action by Google — went viral within the search giant’s internal discussion boards this weekend, with some decrying it and others defending it. Sources said the company’s top execs have been struggling with how to deal with it and the fallout, trying to decide if its troubling content crossed a line.

Apparently it did. In a memo to employees titled “Our words matter,” Google CEO Sundar Pichai said that the employee — who has been named on Twitter, although his identity could not be verified — had violated its code of conduct. (I am not publishing his name, because he — and others who disagree with him — have been threatened with violence online.)

Had the employee not belittled women’s skills, I assume, he would not be let go, but he made claims that many consider problematic, although others maintain that his myriad of claims are worthy.

One thing is clear, the memo has become radioactive at Google.

Multiple sources said the memo has caused a massive debate to go on internally, which has devolved in ways not unlike those taking place across the country. “It has been really toxic,” said one person at Google. “It’s a microcosm of America.”

Still, this is a corporation with rules and managers who rule on those rules. So, what is also true is that most free speech is allowed when it comes to the government and within society, but not necessarily within companies. In fact, it is common for people to lose their jobs for making sexist and racist remarks.

That said, Pichai also noted that the memo did raise some important issues, such as the need for more willingness at Google to include more points of view at the company, including more conservative ones.

It’s really a no-win situation for him or anyone, as these issues engender really profound and often ugly disagreement to take place.

But, as Pichai noted, words matter:

“First, let me say that we strongly support the right of Googlers to express themselves, and much of what was in that memo is fair to debate, regardless of whether a vast majority of Googlers disagree with it. However, portions of the memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace. Our job is to build great products for users that make a difference in their lives. To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK. It is contrary to our basic values and our Code of Conduct, which expects ‘each Googler to do their utmost to create a workplace culture that is free of harassment, intimidation, bias and unlawful discrimination.’”

On Sunday, Google’s head of diversity, Danielle Brown, said in a memo — her first to the company — that she would not link to the employee’s memo because “it’s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.”

Google does not have an easy line to walk, especially since the employee penned a piece he sent across the company that posited, among other things, that women were biologically not suited to do tech.

Titled “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” it begins promisingly enough (and is, for the most part, well-written):

“I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.”

But then, in what is pretty much the main premise, he went on in detail: “I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership.”

What followed was a list of those differences, including a claim that women were more social and artistic and could not take the stress of high-pressure jobs. Hence, “neuroticism,” or higher anxiety and lower stress tolerance, which he claimed was backed up by studies.

Perhaps most disingenuously, the author also claimed that he had no voice, even after penning a 3,000-word memo that he was able to send companywide and also was read by millions more.

In other words, he got heard.

“Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo chamber,” he wrote.

Well, maybe so, but it also looks like it also will lead to more serious consequences for the employee.

Ironically, Google is now hosting a conference on girls in tech.

It is also in the midst of a lawsuit with the Labor Department, which has alleged that Google has a gender gap in pay. The company has denied this, and has declined to provide salary information to the government. But Google, like many tech companies, has released its diversity statistics — men make up almost 70 percent of the staff and a full 80 percent of the technical employees.

Here is the Pichai memo in total — if you want to also read between the lines:

From: Sundar

Subject: Our words matter

This has been a very difficult few days. I wanted to provide an update on the memo that was circulated over this past week.

First, let me say that we strongly support the right of Googlers to express themselves, and much of what was in that memo is fair to debate, regardless of whether a vast majority of Googlers disagree with it. However, portions of the memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace. Our job is to build great products for users that make a difference in their lives. To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK. It is contrary to our basic values and our Code of Conduct, which expects “each Googler to do their utmost to create a workplace culture that is free of harassment, intimidation, bias and unlawful discrimination.”

The memo has clearly impacted our co-workers, some of whom are hurting and feel judged based on their gender. Our co-workers shouldn’t have to worry that each time they open their mouths to speak in a meeting, they have to prove that they are not like the memo states, being “agreeable” rather than “assertive,” showing a “lower stress tolerance,” or being “neurotic.”

At the same time, there are co-workers who are questioning whether they can safely express their views in the workplace (especially those with a minority viewpoint). They too feel under threat, and that is also not OK. People must feel free to express dissent. So to be clear again, many points raised in the memo — such as the portions criticizing Google’s trainings, questioning the role of ideology in the workplace, and debating whether programs for women and underserved groups are sufficiently open to all — are important topics. The author had a right to express their views on those topics — we encourage an environment in which people can do this and it remains our policy to not take action against anyone for prompting these discussions.

The past few days have been very difficult for many at the company, and we need to find a way to debate issues on which we might disagree — while doing so in line with our Code of Conduct. I’d encourage each of you to make an effort over the coming days to reach out to those who might have different perspectives from your own. I will be doing the same.

I have been on work related travel in Africa and Europe the past couple of weeks and had just started my family vacation here this week. I have decided to return tomorrow as clearly there’s a lot more to discuss as a group — including how we create a more inclusive environment for all.

So please join me, along with members of the leadership team at a town hall on Thursday. Check your calendar soon for details.

— Sundar

https://www.recode.net/2017/8/7/16110696/firing-google-ceo-employee-penned-controversial-memo-on-women-has-violated-its-code-of-conduct

Google Anti-Diversity Memo: Fired Engineer Wants To Sue, But Faces Hurdles

Google Fires Employee James Damore Behind Anti-Diversity Memo

The controversy surrounding the firing of former Google engineer James Damore over an internal diversity memo took another turn late Tuesday, as Damore officially filed a formal complaint with the National Labor Relations Board due to his dismissal from Google. It’s also the latest legal move for Damore, who publicly said he wants to take the search giant to court.

At the moment, Damore’s prospects for a case against Google appear to be uncertain. For Google, the company contends the memo clearly had disruptive and hostile effects within its offices. According to a post from Google CEO Sundar Pichai, the former software engineer’s memo had a negative response among Google’s staffers and, more significantly, portions of the document violated the company’scode of conduct for its employees.

Read: Google Anti-Diversity Manifesto Author Identified And Fired

While Google initially struggled to handle the early backlash to the diversity manifesto, the company’s progressive culture eventually guided its response. In past research, Jennifer Chatman, professor of management with the Haas School of Business at the University Of California, Berkeley, found that establishing political correctness norms improved creativity and novel thinking among groups of men and women by removing areas for potential uncertainty.

Chatman told International Business Times that Google’s dismissal of Damore reflected how much the company values maintaining its corporate culture and showed the degree of internal hostility caused by the diversity memo.

“You can have a culture in which people articulate values, but unless those values are actually upheld through supporting behaviors that are aligned with those values and sanctioning those that are not aligned, then you have what I would call a vacuous culture,” Chatman said. “What I think Google is doing is simply standing behind its stated values and that’s indicative of a strong culture. It’s not enough just to have the content, you actually have to enforce the cultural norms.”

google 2Damore’s memo was critical of Google’s approach to diversity hiring and staffing. Photo: Getty

Last week, Damore’s 10-page internal memo blasting Google’s approach to diversity hiring was leaked and initially made public by Motherboard. While Damore initially defends his memo’s focus, writing that he values “diversity and inclusion,” the paper prominently contends that women are not represented at higher levels in the tech industry compared to men because of automatic biological differences.

“Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50 percent representation of women in tech and leadership,” Damore writes. “Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.”

Damore’s memo argues female workers generally tend to be more neurotic and move into less detail-focused fields of work due to how they prefer “people rather than things.” It also touches on the dominance of progressive points of view within Silicon Valley and Damore also said that conservative voices are underrepresented at companies like Google.

For female engineers, coders and other technical employees, the idea that a staffer would openly argue that they were at a disadvantage because of their gender and that other employees supported this viewpoint was likely untenable for Google. As Wired reported, the memo received its share of opposition and support within Google’s internal discussion threads. In his memo, Pichai also defended the right to debate and dissenting opinions within Google, but said the memo’s language crossed a line.

Read: James Damore Files NLRB Complaint After Google Memo Firing

“To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK,” Pichai said.

In a blog post, former Google senior engineer Yonatan Zunger also points out the practical concerns of trying to continue to work with an employee with a toxic internal reputation:

And as for its impact on you: Do you understand that at this point, I could not in good conscience assign anyone to work with you? I certainly couldn’t assign any women to deal with this, a good number of the people you might have to work with may simply punch you in the face, and even if there were a group of like-minded individuals I could put you with, nobody would be able to collaborate with them. You have just created a textbook hostile workplace environment.

Legal experts have also dismissed common online opposition to the firing on free speech grounds. As a tech company, Google is a private business that’s not subject to First Amendment guidelines.

Plus, the diversity memo would have be a persistent headache for Google if it had chosen to keep Damore onboard as an employee. According to Richard Ford, professor of law at Stanford Law School, employers have a legal obligation to reject blatant instances of discriminatory behavior in the workplace and the Damore memo would’ve been a clear-cut and publicly documented example of this type of comment.

California law does offer some basic protections against alleged retaliation to political speech, but it typically focuses on organizing and activism done outside of the office. Damore’s potential case could argue that he was engaging in worker-related activism, but Ford told IBT that this would a difficult legal approach to pursue.

“Federal labor law prohibits employers from taking adverse action against employees who engaged in work related organizing advocacy (such as union organizing),” Ford said. “This is probably his best shot, but it is a big stretch: the law is designed to protect labor organizing — not general political expression or general criticism of the employer.”

 

Google Memo Full Text

Google Memo 1

Google Memo 2

Google memo 3

Google Memo 4

Google Memo 5

Google Memo 6

Google Memo 7

Google Memo 8

Google Memo 9

Google Memo 10

http://www.ibtimes.com/google-anti-diversity-memo-fired-engineer-wants-sue-faces-hurdles-2576459

 

 

 

 

 

Google Fires Engineer Over Memo Criticizing Corporate Cult of Diversity

Google employee made waves when he wrote a 10-page letter ripping the cultist approach to diversity at the campus where he worked and now he has been sent packing by the Orwellian tech giant which has found him guilty of thought crime and independent thinking, both of which are verboten in corporate America.

James Damore was fired after his epic and courageous communique that called into question Google’s policies on forced diversity, biases and the biological unsuitability of women for certain managerial roles in the high-stress corporate environment.

The memo was strictly Mr. Damore’s personal opinion and he makes a lot of very good points that are taboo in today’s corporate fascist environment in which this humble author has personally toiled in.

Take my word that corporate America is an oppressive environment policed by overzealous human resources goon squads and since the election of Donald Trump as president, has become progressively more intolerant to those with conservative viewpoints. Some corporations are even hiring third parties to aggressively monitor off-work social media use by employees, a clear violation of free speech as well as an exercise in witch hunting.

It’s hard to overstate just how bad that it has gotten in the corporate world today. Office grudges can be turned into career killers based on nothing but accusations in which a white male is guilty until proven innocent which is nearly impossible before a kangaroo court of busybodies and social engineers whose biases are sanctioned at the highest levels.

Damore’s memo was rapidly spun into him being a misogynist and a bigot and drew hate and scorn from the left as well as the personal involvement of Google CEO Sundar Pichai resulting in his termination.

Reuters is reporting “Google fires employee behind anti-diversity memo”:

Internet giant Google has fired the male engineer at the center of an uproar in Silicon Valley over the past week after he authored an internal memo asserting there are biological causes behind gender inequality in the tech industry.

James Damore, the engineer who wrote the memo, confirmed his dismissal, saying in an email to Reuters on Monday that he had been fired for “perpetuating gender stereotypes”.

Damore said he was exploring all possible legal remedies, and that before being fired, he had submitted a charge to the U.S. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) accusing Google upper management of trying to shame him into silence.

“It’s illegal to retaliate against an NLRB charge,” he wrote in the email.

Google, a unit of Alphabet Inc based in Mountain View, Calif., said it could not talk about individual employee cases.

Google Chief Executive Sundar Pichai told employees in a note on Monday that portions of the anti-diversity memo “violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace,” according to a copy of the note seen by Reuters.

Tech website Gizmodo published the memo in its entirety, read it HERE.

A few excerpts:

I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem. Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo chamber. Despite what the public response seems to have been, I’ve gotten many personal messages from fellow Googlers expressing their gratitude for bringing up these very important issues which they agree with but would never have the courage to say or defend because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired. This needs to change.

AND

People generally have good intentions, but we all have biases which are invisible to us. Thankfully, open and honest discussion with those who disagree can highlight our blind spots and help us grow, which is why I wrote this document. Google has several biases and honest discussion about these biases is being silenced by the dominant ideology. What follows is by no means the complete story, but it’s a perspective that desperately needs to be told at Google.

Google’s biases

At Google, we talk so much about unconscious bias as it applies to race and gender, but we rarely discuss our moral biases. Political orientation is actually a result of deep moral preferences and thus biases. Considering that the overwhelming majority of the social sciences, media, and Google lean left, we should critically examine these prejudices.

Unfortunately, in today’s toxic corporate diversity culture such a memo is a suicide note.

Mr. Damore is already being smeared as an Alt-Right fanatic which is the newest catch-all term that the intolerant left uses to label anyone who disagrees with them by throwing them into a nebulous group that ranges from anyone who has ever been critical of Hillary Clinton or U.S. foreign policy towards Russia to full-blown white supremacists. Most of America never even heard the term until Clinton used it as the basis of one of her demagogic speeches on the campaign trail last year. Now Damore has become just another member of that basket of

Most of America never even heard the term until Clinton used it as the basis of one of her demagogic speeches on the campaign trail last year. Now Damore has become just another member of that basket of deplorables that holds those who do not adhere to the false religion of identity politics.

Forced diversity is to corporate America what eugenics was to the Nazis and it is only going to continue to proliferate unless there is an honest national discussion on how damaging that such practices truly are. Hopefully Damore’s letter can be the start of that conversation.

Wake up Right!Subscribe to our Morning Briefing and get the news delivered to your inbox before breakfast!

Silicon Valley Firms Are Even Whiter and More Male Than You Thought

Our exclusive data shows that Google, which just released diversity numbers, lags further behind than other major tech firms.

The gender and ethnicity of Google’s overall workforce Official Google Blog

After stalling for years, Google finally released data on the diversity of its workforce Wednesday, admitting that the company is “miles from where want to be.” Lazlo Bock, Google’s senior vice president of people operations, noted that “being totally clear about the extent of the problem is a really important part of the solution,” adding that the company is supporting code education among historically underrepresented groups.

But those efforts may not be enough. Exclusive data obtained from the Labor Department by Mother Jones shows that top Silicon Valley tech firms lag far behind the general population in diversity, and that while Google is average in its recruitment of women, it has even fewer African-American and Latino employees than other major tech firms.

Google is far from the only Silicon Valley firm that has been tight-lipped about its demographics. Though large companies are legally obligated to report race and gender stats to the federal government, tech firms such as Google, Apple, and Oracle long ago convinced the Labor Department to treat the data as a “trade secret” and withhold it from the public. Mike Swift of the San Jose Mercury News sued the department to get the numbers. In 2010, following a two-year legal battle, he ultimately settled for stats for a handful of the Valley’s largest companies.

Swift’s data went through 2005. To get an update, I filed a Freedom of Information Act request a few months ago asking the Labor Department for its latest race and gender data on the top 10 firms. In order of largest to smallest by market capitalization, it now consists of Apple, Google, Oracle, Cisco Systems, Intel, Gilead Sciences, eBay, Facebook, Hewlett-Packard, and VMware. When I reached out for comment, most of these companies didn’t get back to me. Google responded that it intended to make its stats public, as it now has. The chart up top shows stats for Google’s workforce overall. The nontech workforce is a lot more balanced. But when you look at just the tech jobs, things are far less diverse. For example, 83 percent of the tech jobs are held by men, and 94 percent of those workers are white or Asian.

 

Google’s tech workforce is far less diverse than its overall workforce. Google

The data I obtained shows that Silicon Valley’s race and gender disparities also are wider when limited to executives and top managers, and more dramatic when compared to the makeup of the state workforce. Google’s stats reflect the same: Its “leadership” is 79 percent male and 72 percent white, which would put it a bit ahead of its peers, except that the report is vague about which specific positions are being included. Here’s what things look like for the Valley’s Top 10 firms, based on our Labor Department data:

 

The data obtained by Mother Jones illustrates that “many companies pay lip service to diversity rather than making the real changes,” says Telle Whitney, president and CEO of the Anita Borg Institute, a Palo Alto-based nonprofit that promotes the recruitment and retention of women in technology.

Though the technology gender gap originates in college—only about 18 percent of computer science graduates are women—Whitney believes that the imbalance ultimately stems from the failure of Silicon Valley’s leaders to groom more women for top positions, which in turn discourages younger women from entering the field. “First it has to be a priority to have a diverse workforce,” she says. “And the priority has to come from the top.”

Not all of a tech firm’s employees work as coders or engineers. But among those people directly employed in technology positions at Bay Area tech firms, Asians have actually surpassed whites as the dominant racial group:

These numbers are driven, in part, by the heavy reliance of tech companies on the H-1B visa program, which allows US firms to import up to 65,000 foreign workers each year to fill jobs that require “specialized knowledge.” In 2012, more than 40 percent of the H-1B workers in the United States came from India, China, or South Korea. Many of them earn less money for comparable jobs than their American counterparts, which is perhaps one reason why major tech firms have lobbied furiously in Washington to increase the H-1B visa cap.

But Asian Americans are also represented at a high rate in Silicon Valley, and are overrepresented among high school students taking the AP computer science exam:

Prominent techies like to say that the Valley is a pure meritocracy, but the glaring disparities make that a dubious claim. “In polite company, I would say it’s a fallacy,” says Laura Weidman Powers, the executive director of Code2040, a San Francisco-based nonprofit that promotes racial diversity in tech hiring. “In impolite company, I would say it’s bullshit.”

Powers doesn’t think tech corporate leaders are discriminating deliberately; the factors working against black and Latino candidates are more subtle and structural. “Referrals are a huge source of inbound talent for these companies, even when you look at a company as large as a Google or a Facebook,” Powers notes. Given that most Americans run in the social networks of people who look like them, the system benefits the Valley’s dominant groups at the expense of those on the outside.

Code2040 tries to disrupt that dynamic by actively recruiting talented African American and Latino computer science graduates and plugging them into internships at tech companies. But the group still struggles to convince CEOs to make diversity a goal. “For the tech industry, this is newer,” she says. “There is a pretty pervasive mindset of ‘Oh, we’re colorblind. We just see talent.’”

The best case for increasing diversity in Silicon Valley may be financial. Powers’ group gets its name from the year 2040, when people of color are expected to make up the majority of the US population. She argues that tech firms need to hire more people who reflect and understand their customer base. “For any company that has a consumer-facing product” a few years from now, she says, “the communities that use that product will look different.”

Correction: A previous version of this post included a chart showing diversity at Silicon Valley’s top 10 companies in 1999 vs 2012. There was a misinterpretation about one of the datasets used for the chart, so we have since removed it. In addition, the article has been amended to address Google’s breakdown according to tech and nontech jobs, and “leadership” positions.

http://www.motherjones.com/media/2014/05/google-diversity-labor-gender-race-gap-workers-silicon-valley/

Diversity stats: 10 tech companies that have come clean

Tech companies often draw criticism for being exclusive and lacking diversity. Here are ten companies that have released diversity numbers to the public. See how they compare.

Diversity is a hot topic among tech companies. More and more, companies are no longer making excuses, rather, they are taking actionable steps to be more diverse in terms of both gender and ethnicity. From corporate giants to early stage startups, many companies are working towards transparency in the workplace.

The following ten companies have released workforce diversity reports. Here’s how they compare.

Google

Google was one of the first big companies to release a report detailing its diversity. Global gender data indicates that Google employees are 70% male and 30% female. Google’s ethnicity data refers to US employees only, and indicates 61% white, 30% Asian, 4% identifying as two or more races, 3% Hispanic, 2% black, and 1% other. Google also has employee resource groups for employees, including groups for Googlers of specific races, veterans, women in engineering, and LGBT employees.

Apple

Apple’s diversity report indicates the same global gender ratio as Google, with 30% female and 70% male employees. When broken down into roles specified as “tech,” that ration changes to 80% male and 20% female. Apple’s US employees are 55% white, 15% Asian, 11% Hispanic, 7% Black, 2% as two or more races, 1% other, and 9% undeclared. CEO Tim Cook was recently noticed for his participation in San Francisco’s annual Gay Pride parade.

Facebook

Facebook released its diversity report in June 2014, showing a similar trend in numbers as companies that went before it. Facebook employees are 69% male and 31% female globally. However, jobs labeled as “non-tech” are 53% male and 47% female. Facebook also only released US ethnic data, which showed a workforce with more than half of the employees identifying as white. For tech jobs at Facebook, 41% of employees identified as Asian, with 3% identifying as Hispanic, and 1% identifying as black.

Twitter

Twitter released its diversity report on the heels of Facebook, in July 2014. Globally, Twitter has the same gender spread seen at the other big companies — 70% male and 30% female. While both genders are equally represented at 50% in “non-tech” jobs, the “tech” jobs at Twitter are 90% male and 10% female. Twitter’s data on employee ethnicity was also US-only, indicating 59% white, 29% Asian, 3% Hispanic, 2% black, 3% two or more races, 2% other, 1% native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and less than 1% Native American. Twitter also has employee-led affinity groups for employees of color, LGBT employees, and female employees.

Yahoo

Yahoo made headlines when Marissa Mayer became CEO in the summer of 2012, becoming one of the first female CEOs of a highly-visible tech brand. Yahoo’s global workforce is 62% male, 37% female, and 1% un-disclosed. For “non-tech” jobs, Yahoo actually has more female employees than male. Yahoo’s data was released in June 2014, around the same time that many other tech companies were releasing their diversity numbers. At that time, Yahoo reported that its US workforce was 50% white, 39% Asian, 4% Hispanic, 2% black, 2% two or more races, and 2% other or not disclosed.

LinkedIn

Pandora

Music-streaming service Pandora lists its diversity numbers on the careers section of its website. Pandora total employee ratio is 50.8% male and 49.2% female, with tech jobs more than 82% male. Leadership at Pandora is almost 85% male. Pandora’s overall workforce is 70.9% white, 12.3% Asian, 7.2% Hispanic, 5.7% two or more races, 3% black, and 1% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. Like others, the company has communities for different employees with Pandora Women for female employees, Pandora PRIDE for LGBT employees, and Pandora Mixtape for employees of color.

Pinterest

Pinterest was one of the bigger “startups” to share it numbers during the summer of 2014 when the Goliaths all started spilling the beans. According to the official Pinterest engineering blog, the company is 60% male and 40% female. Most of Pinterest’s gender ratio numbers show a male majority, but not in business operations. Pinterest’s business employees are 66% female and 34% male, although tech jobs are almost 80% male at Pinterest. Pinterest employees are 50% white, 42% Asian, 5% other, 2% Hispanic, and 1% black.

eBay

eBay’s employees around the world are 42% female and 58% male, with its “tech” jobs split at 76% male and 24% female. eBay’s “non-tech” jobs are only 1% off, in favor of male employees, from being even. US data shows eBay’s workforce at 61% white, 24% Asian, 7% black, 5% Hispanic, 1% multi-ethnic, and 1% other. For “tech” jobs at eBay, 55% of employees are Asian and 40% are white, with numbers for both black and Hispanic employees hovering to 2%. eBay had 33,000 employees at the time of its report on its blog, also mentioning that CEO John Donahoe launched the Women’s Initiative Network for eBay.

HP

In 2013, HP employed roughly 317,500 people worldwide, and tracked its diversity among gender and ethnicity sometimes all the way back to 2009. Worldwide, HP’s workforce was 32.5% female in 2013, with 25.6% of managers being female as well. In total, HP’s US workforce is 71.5% white, 14.22% Asian, 6.9% black, 6.06% Hispanic, 0.74% two or more races, 0.48% Native American, and 0.10% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. In 2013, HP announced Ascend, a sponsorship program for high-performing female employees, and a Women’s Innovation Council. According to the report, HP also partners with organizations such as Leadership Education for Asian Pacifics (LEAP) and the National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering to increase cultural competency.

Also see

http://www.techrepublic.com/article/diversity-stats-10-tech-companies-that-have-come-clean/

 

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 938-943

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 926-937

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 916-925

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 906-915

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 889-896

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 884-888

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 878-883

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 870-877

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 864-869

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 857-863

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 850-856

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 845-849

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 840-844

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 833-839

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 827-832

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 821-826

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 815-820

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 806-814

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 800-805

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 DownloadShows 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 Shows 151-157

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

Advertisements
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Pronk Pops Show 929, July 17, 2017, Story 1: Downsizing The Federal Government or Draining The Swap: Trump Should Permanently Close 8 Departments Not Appoint People To Run Them — Cut All Other Department Budgets by 20% — Video — Story 2: Federal Spending Breaks $4 Trillion for Fiscal Year 2017 — Story 3: The American People and President Trump Vs. Political Elitist Establishment of The Big Government Democratic and Republican Parties — Videos

Posted on July 18, 2017. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Breaking News, Business, Cartoons, Coal, Communications, Congress, Constitutional Law, Corruption, Countries, Crime, Culture, Currencies, Defense Spending, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Education, Elections, Empires, Employment, Federal Government, Government, Government Spending, Health, Health Care, Health Care Insurance, History, House of Representatives, Human, Independence, Insurance, Law, Life, Medicare, Movies, Natural Gas, Oil, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, President Trump, Progressives, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Resources, Security, Senate, Social Security, Taxation, Taxes, U.S. Dollar, Unemployment, United States of America, Videos, Welfare Spending, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 929,  July 17, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 928,  July 13, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 927,  July 12, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 926,  July 11, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 925,  July 10, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 924,  July 6, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 923,  July 5, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 922,  July 3, 2017 

Pronk Pops Show 921,  June 29, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 920,  June 28, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 919,  June 27, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 918,  June 26, 2017 

Pronk Pops Show 917,  June 22, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 916,  June 21, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 915,  June 20, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 914,  June 19, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 913,  June 16, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 912,  June 15, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 911,  June 14, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 910,  June 13, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 909,  June 12, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 908,  June 9, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 907,  June 8, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 906,  June 7, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 905,  June 6, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 904,  June 5, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 903,  June 1, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 902,  May 31, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 901,  May 30, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 900,  May 25, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 899,  May 24, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 898,  May 23, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 897,  May 22, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 896,  May 18, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 895,  May 17, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 894,  May 16, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 893,  May 15, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 892,  May 12, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 891,  May 11, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 890,  May 10, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 889,  May 9, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 888,  May 8, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 887,  May 5, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 886,  May 4, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 885,  May 3, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 884,  May 1, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 883 April 28, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 882: April 27, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 881: April 26, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 880: April 25, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 879: April 24, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 878: April 21, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 877: April 20, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 876: April 19, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 875: April 18, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 874: April 17, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 873: April 13, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 872: April 12, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 871: April 11, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 870: April 10, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 869: April 7, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 868: April 6, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 867: April 5, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 866: April 3, 2017

Image result for cartoons on big government democratic and republican partiesImage result for cartoons on big fat governmentBar Chart of Government Spending by AgencyImage result for cartoons on big government democratic and republican parties

Image result for cartoons the american people and trump vs washington establishment

 

Story 1: Downsizing The Federal Government or Draining The Swap: Trump Should Permanently Close 8 Departments Not Appoint People To Run Them — Cut All Other Department Budgets by 20% — Video

Order of Establishment of the Executive Departments

Rank*
Year
Executive Departments
1
1789
2
1789
3
1789
1947
Department of War
Department of Defense (merger of War and Navy departments)
4
1789
1870
Attorney General
Department of Justice
1798
Department of the Navy
(merged with War Department in 1947)
1829
Postmaster General
(Post Office privatized in 1970)
5
1849
6
1862
1903
Department of Commerce and Labor
(Departments split in 1913)
7
1913
8
1913
9
1953
1980
10
1965
11
1966
12
1977
13
1979
14
1989
15
2002

Close Permanently The Following Federal Departments

1. Department of Agriculture

2. Department of Commerce

3. Department of Education

4. Department of Energy

5. Department of Housing and Urban Development

6. Department of Interior

7. Department of Labor

8. Department of Transportation

Keep Open The Following Federal Departments 

But Cut Budgets By 20 Percent

1. Department of Defense

2. Department of State

3. Department of Treasury

4. Department of Justice

5. Department of Veterans’ Affairs

6. Department of Health and Human Services

7. Department of Homeland Security

How to Solve America’s Spending Problem

Government: Is it Ever Big Enough?

The Bigger the Government…

The War on Work

What Creates Wealth?

The Promise of Free Enterprise

Why Capitalism Works

What is Crony Capitalism?

WH Website Asks Americans to Suggest Ways to Reorganize, Eliminate Federal Gov’t

Trump signs order to cut government costs

President Trump Signs Executive Order to Cut Government Costs

Trump orders a total examination and reorganization of federal agencies.

Downsizing the Federal Government

Dan Mitchell Commenting on Downsizing Government and Federal Bureaucracy

TAKE IT TO THE LIMITS: Milton Friedman on Libertarianism

Bureaucracy Basics: Crash Course Government and Politics #15

Types of Bureaucracies: Crash Course Government and Politics #16

Controlling Bureaucracies: Crash Course Government and Politics #17

Can the United States Reform its Way to Financial Security?

 

President Trump has filled far fewer top jobs in cabinet or cabinet-level agencies than President Barack Obama had at this point in his presidency.

The status of top jobs
25 weeks into each administration:

Confirmed
by Senate
Nominated or
Announced
Empty
Trump 33 57 120
Obama 126 43 41

Story 2: Federal Spending Breaks $4 Trillion for Fiscal Year 2017 — Videos

Bar Chart of Government Spending by Agency

The bar chart comes directly from the Monthly Treasury Statement published by the U. S. Treasury Department. <—- Click on the chart for more info.

The “Debt Total” bar chart is generated from the Treasury Department’s “Debt Report” found on the Treasury Direct web site. It has links to search the debt for any given date range, and access to debt interest information. It is a direct source to government provided budget information.

$$$ — “Deficit” vs. “Debt”— $$$

Suppose you spend more money this month than your income. This situation is called a “budget deficit”. So you borrow (ie; use your credit card). The amount you borrowed (and now owe) is called your debt. You have to pay interest on your debt. If next month you spend more than your income, another deficit, you must borrow some more, and you’ll still have to pay the interest on your debt (now larger). If you have a deficit every month, you keep borrowing and your debt grows. Soon the interest payment on your loan is bigger than any other item in your budget. Eventually, all you can do is pay the interest payment, and you don’t have any money left over for anything else. This situation is known as bankruptcy.

“Reducing the deficit” is a meaningless soundbite. If the DEFICIT is any amount more than ZERO, we have to borrow more and the DEBT grows.

Each year since 1969, Congress has spent more money than its income. The Treasury Department has to borrow money to meet Congress’s appropriations. Here is a direct link to the Congressional Budget Office web site. Check out the CBO’s assessment of the Debt. We have to pay interest* on that huge, growing debt; and it dramatically cuts into our budget.

Huge Mistake! White House Reveals Budget Deficit Will Be $250 BILLION Greater

Federal Spending to Top a Record $4 Trillion in FY2017

1. June Unemployment Report Was Better Than Expected
2. Federal Spending to Blow Through $4 Trillion in FY2017
3. What Does the Government Spend Our Tax Dollars On?
4.Even President Trump’s Federal Budget Increases Spending

Overview

Both the Congressional Budget Office and the White House Office of Management and Budget announced last week that federal spending will top $4 trillion for the first time ever in fiscal 2017, which began on October 1, 2016 and ends on September 30.

The Congressional Budget Office released its annual “Budget and Economic Outlook: 2017 to 2027” last week in which it projected that total federal spending in fiscal 2017 will hit a record $4,008,000,000,000. That’s up from the previous record of $3.853 trillion spent in fiscal 2016.

While most Americans have no idea how much our out-of-control government spends each year, much less what our enormous annual federal budget deficits are, long-time clients and readers, know this is a topic I focus on and warn about each and every year – and will again today. This is something every American voter should absolutely know about!

Yet before we get to those discussions, I will summarize last Friday’s better than expected unemployment report for June. The strong jobs report had several significant implications for the economy going forward as I will discuss below. Let’s get started.

June Unemployment Report Was Better Than Expected

Friday’s unemployment report for June was a welcome surprise, especially following the weaker than expected report for May. The Labor Department reported at the end of last week that the economy created 222,000 new jobs in June, up from only 152,000 in May – and well above the pre-report expectation of 179,000.

The increase in new jobs in June was the largest in four months and the second highest of the year. Hiring was also revised higher for May and April than previously reported. The pickup in hiring in the spring coincides with a fresh spurt of growth in the economy after a slow start to the year.

Monthly change in nonfarm payrolls

The headline unemployment rate rose slightly from 4.3% in May to 4.4% in June, but that was largely because more jobless Americans rejoined the labor force by actively looking for work last month. That’s a good thing.

Hourly pay rose 0.2% to $26.25 an hour in June, the government said. Over the last 12 months, wages have only advanced a modest 2.5% — up slightly from the rate reported for May, but still well below the usual gains at this late stage of an economic expansion.

Underemployment, which measures people who want to be working full-time but are not, rose to 8.6% in June from 8.4% in May. It‘s still far lower than in prior years but it’s never a good sign to see this measure tick up.

The number of Americans who work part-time but want a full-time job also rose a notch to 5.3 million in June. Part-time employment has been a persistent problem for job seekers since the recession ended, as many companies try to limit increases in full-time workers.

Overall, economists say the strong job gains in June reflect a healthy labor market. Some believe we are approaching the level of “full employment.”

Federal Spending to Blow Through $4 Trillion in FY2017

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reported last week that federal spending will top $4 trillion for the first time ever in fiscal 2017, which ends on September 30.

The CBO released its annual “Budget and Economic Outlook: 2017 to 2027” last week in which it projected that total federal spending in fiscal 2017 will hit a record $4.008 trillion. That’s up from the previous record of $3.853 trillion spent in fiscal 2016.

Federal spending to top $4 trillion

The record $4.008 trillion the CBO estimates the federal government will spend this fiscal year equals $33,805 for each of the 118,562,000 households the Census Bureau estimated were in the United States as of March.

I should note for the record that while federal spending will top $4 trillion for the first time this year while Donald Trump is president, this year’s spending is actually tied to Barack Obama’s budget passed in his last year in office. So don’t blame President Trump… yet.

The federal budget goes up every single year, no matter which party is in office, and no matter that our national debt will top $20 trillion later this year. Clearly, federal spending is out of control, and no one in Washington, DC has the will to stop it – including President Trump (more on this below).

Apparently, leaders in both parties no longer believe there is a limit to how much our country can borrow and spend. There is no longer any sense that our ballooning national debt will at some point trigger a new financial crisis much worse than what we experienced in late 2007-early 2009.

Worst of all, WE keep electing and re-electing these people. In that sense, it’s our own fault.

What Does the Government Spend Our Tax Dollars On?

Many (if not most) Americans don’t understand how and where the government spends our tax dollars and the tens of billions it borrows each and every year. That’s what we will take a look at in the discussion just below. Let’s start with this graphic for an overview.

Government spending

Pew Research had an excellent analysis on how the federal government spends our money (and what it borrows) earlier this year. I’ll reprint the highlights for you below (emphasis mine).

“When thinking about federal spending, it’s worth remembering that, as former Treasury official Peter Fisher once said, the federal government is basically ‘a gigantic insurance company,’ albeit one with ‘a sideline business in national defense and homeland security.’

In fiscal year 2016, which ended this past September 30, the federal government spent just under $4 trillion, and about $2.7 trillion – more than two-thirds of the total – went for various kinds of social insurance (Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare, unemployment compensation, Veterans benefits and the like).

Another $604 billion, or 15.3% of total spending, went for national defense; net interest payments on government debt was about $240 billion, or 6.1%. Education aid and related social services were about$114 billion, or less than 3% of all federal spending. Everything else – crop subsidies, space travel, highway repairs, national parks, foreign aid and much, much more – accounted for the remaining 6%.

It can be helpful to look at federal spending as a share of the overall US economy, which provides a consistent frame of reference over long periods. In fiscal 2016, total federal outlays were 21.5% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). For most of the past several decades, federal spending has hovered within a few percentage points above or below 20%.

The biggest recent exception came in the wake of the 2008 mortgage crash: In fiscal 2009, a surge in federal relief spending combined with a shrinking economy to push federal outlays to 24.4% of GDP, the highest level since World War II — when federal spending peaked at nearly 43% of GDP.

Social security, Medicare, human services a growing share of spendingMeasured as a share of GDP, the biggest long-term growth in federal spending has come in human services, a broad category that includes various kinds of social insurance, other health programs, education aid and veterans benefits.

From less than 1% of GDP during World War II (when many Depression-era aid programs were either ended or shifted to the war effort), federal spending on human services now amounts to 15.5% of GDP.

It actually was higher – 16.1% – in fiscal 2010, largely due to greater spending on unemployment compensation, food assistance and other forms of aid during the Great Recession. Now, the main growth drivers of human-services spending are Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security.

While spending on human services has grown to represent a greater share of GDP over time, the defense share has become smaller: It was 3.3% in fiscal 2016, versus 4.7% as recently as fiscal 2010. In general, and perhaps not surprisingly, defense spending consumes more of GDP during wartime (well over a third at the height of World War II) and less during peacetime.

The major exception was the Reagan-era military buildup… From a post-Vietnam low of 4.5% of GDP in fiscal 1979, defense spending eventually peaked at 6% of GDP in fiscal 1986.

Besides human services and national defense, the next-biggest category of federal spending is interest on public debt. Excluding interest paid to government trust funds (such as the Social Security and military-retirement trust funds) and various other small government loanprograms, the $240 billion in net interest paid on federal debt in fiscal 2016 represented 1.3% of GDP. [Remember that interest rates are near historic lows today.]

Even though total public debt has continued to grow (it stood at nearly $19.96 trillion in February, hitting the statutory debt limit), the dollar amount of actual interest paid fluctuates with the general interest rate environment. Rates are quite low now, but they were much higher in the 1980s and 1990s; in those decades, net interest payments often approached or exceeded 3% of GDP. END QUOTE

Even President Trump’s Federal Budget Increases Spending

Back in March, President Trump unveiled a controversial new federal budget proposal for fiscal year 2018, which begins on October 1st. The budget was a shocker in that it proposed cutting spending in every federal agency except Defense, Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs.

The new budget would slash Environmental Protection Agency spending by over 31% next year and cut State Department spending by over 28%, all in one fell swoop. It is by far the most conservative, smaller government budget we have seen in my adult lifetime.

Trump proposals for government agency budget changes

Yet as I wrote on March 21, Mr. Trump’s so-called “skinny budget” has no chance of becoming law. I bring it back up today only to point out that even with Trump’s massive government agency cuts (which will never pass), federal spending still increases in FY2018.

As noted above, the CBO and the OMB now agree that federal spending in FY2017 will be apprx. $4.008 trillion. In Trump’s proposed budget, federal spending would reach apprx. $4.094 trillion. And it goes up each year thereafter, soaring to $5.7 trillion by 2027 – even under Trump’s skinny budget.

The sad reality is that our politicians will not take definitive actions to slow the rise in our national debt. Perhaps that’s because half of American households receive direct benefits from government programs like Medicare, Social Security, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps), nutrition programs for mothers and children, subsidized housing and unemployment assistance, to name just a few.

That’s another topic for another day. The point is, federal spending is out of control, and our leaders have no intention of stopping or reversing this dangerous trend. What this means is that we are destined for another serious financial crisis at some point. The markets and our creditors will decide when and it won’t be pretty!

Wishing you well,
Gary D. Halbert

Forecasts & Trends E-Letter is published by Halbert Wealth Management, Inc. Gary D. Halbert is the president and CEO of Halbert Wealth Management, Inc. and is the editor of this publication. Information contained herein is taken from sources believed to be reliable but cannot be guaranteed as to its accuracy. Opinions and recommendations herein generally reflect the judgement of Gary D. Halbert (or another named author) and may change at any time without written notice. Market opinions contained herein are intended as general observations and are not intended as specific investment advice. Readers are urged to check with their investment counselors before making any investment decisions. This electronic newsletter does not constitute an offer of sale of any securities. Gary D. Halbert, Halbert Wealth Management, Inc., and its affiliated companies, its officers, directors and/or employees may or may not have investments in markets or programs mentioned herein. Past results are not necessarily indicative of future results. Reprinting for family or friends is allowed with proper credit. However, republishing (written or electronically) in its entirety or through the use of extensive quotes is prohibited without prior written consent.

https://www.advisorperspectives.com/commentaries/2017/07/11/federal-spending-to-top-a-record-4-trillion-in-fy2017?channel=Economic%20Insights

Social Security Will Be Paying Out More Than It Receives In Just Five Years

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

When social security was first implemented in the 1930’s, America was a very different country. Especially in regards to demographics. The average life expectancy was roughly 18 years younger than it is now, and birth rates were a bit higher than they are now. By the 1950’s, the fertility rate was twice as high as it is in the 21st century.

In other words, for the first few decades, social security seemed very sustainable. Most people would only live long enough to benefit from it for a few years, and there was an abundance of young workers who could pay into the system.

Those days are long gone. As birth rates plummet and people live longer, (which otherwise should be considered a positive development) social security’s future is looking more and more bleak.

No matter how you slice it, it doesn’t seem possible to keep social security funded. In fact, social security is going to start paying out more money than it receives in just a few short years. It may even be insolvent before the baby boomer generation dies off.

According to the Social Security Board of Trustees, the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) Trust Funds will be depleted in 2034.

When this happens, only 77 percent of benefits will be payable. That estimate is no change from last year’s estimate.

In addition, the Disability Insurance trust fund will be depleted in 2028, which is an improvement from last year’s estimate of 2023. Once that fund is depleted, 93 percent of benefits will be paid.

Right now, Social Security continues to take in through revenue more than it pays it through benefits, which is expected to continue until 2022. Once Social Security begins to pay out more than it takes in, it will be forced to liquidate the assets held by the trust funds.

In 2016, Social Security generated $957 billion in income. It only paid out $922 billion including $911 billion in benefits to 61 million beneficiaries.

But the solutions that have been proposed for this problem don’t hold much promise. For instance, we know that simply raising taxes won’t work.

But increasing the payroll tax is not a good long-term solution to fixing Social Security. For example a higher payroll tax would have negative economic effects. In addition, it’s not even clear that raising the payroll tax would even generate enough revenue.

“Some claim that the solution to preserving Social Security is to raise more taxes, but history shows that doesn’t work,” said David Barnes who is the director of policy engagement for Generation Opportunity in a statement to the Washington Free Beacon. “In fact, since Social Security was created, payroll taxes have been raised more than 20 times. Twenty times! Yet, the program is still headed towards insolvency.”

This is one reason why so many Western countries, almost all of which are suffering from declining birth rates, have been so eager to open their borders to more immigrants. They’re trying to bring in as many young workers as they can.

But that’s not going to work either. Forget about the high crime rates, terrorist attacks, and social disintegration that Europe is facing now after bringing in millions of immigrants. Even if those problems didn’t exist, immigration isn’t the solution. The West has had wide open borders for decades, and it hasn’t made a dent in the liabilities faced by social security programs (perhaps these immigrants aren’t paying as many taxes as these governments had hoped).

We could let younger generations opt out of social security to stave off future obligations, but that wouldn’t help fund the current generation of retirees. Social security is already on the path to being underfunded for them, and letting young people opt out would obviously make things worst for current retirees.

There isn’t really any viable solution for paying off the future liabilities of social security, aside from cutting the benefits or increasing the retirement age. Otherwise it’s going to run out of money eventually, which is the same story with private and public pensions. We are all paying for our retirements in one form or another, but few of us living right now are going to fully benefit from it.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-19/social-security-will-be-paying-out-more-it-receives-just-five-years

Story 3: The American People and President Trump Vs. Political Elitist Establishment of The Big Government Democratic and Republican Parties — Videos

Ronald Reagan .. “Government is the problem”

The Bigger the Government…

Government: Is it Ever Big Enough?

How Big Should Government Be? Left vs. Right #1

Big Government Kills Small Businesses

Socialist explains why we need big government and more freebies

 

Why universal basic income is gaining support, critics

July 15, 2017 Updated: July 17, 2017 11:49am

The idea of government giving every person a universal basic income has been gaining traction thanks in part to endorsements from some Silicon Valley celebs. Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, venture capitalist Marc Andreessen and others want to explore the idea.

The idea of government giving every person a universal basic income has been gaining traction thanks in part to endorsements from some Silicon Valley celebs. Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, venture capitalist Marc Andreessen and others want to explore the idea.

The idea of a universal basic income — monthly cash payments from the government to every individual, working or not, with no strings attached — is gaining traction, thanks in part to endorsements from Silicon Valley celebs.

Some see it as a way to compensate for the traditional jobs with benefits that will be wiped out by robotics, artificial intelligence, self-driving vehicles, globalization and the gig economy. Others see it as a way to reduce income inequality or to create a more efficient, less stigmatizing safety net than our current mishmash of welfare benefits.

“I think ultimately we will have to have some kind of universal basic income, I don’t think we are going to have a choice,” Tesla CEO Elon Musk said at the World Government Summit in Dubai in February.

In a commencement speech at Harvard University in May, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said, “We should explore ideas like universal basic income to give everyone a cushion to try new things.” And in a July 4 blog post,Zuckerberg praised Alaska’s Permanent Fund Dividend, the nearest thing to universal income in this or any country. Since 1982, Alaska has been distributing some of its oil revenue as an annual payment, ranging from about $1,000 to $3,000, to every resident including children.

Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes, venture capitalist Marc Andreessen and Y Combinator president Sam Altman have all said it’s worth exploring. Y Combinator’s nonprofit research lab started a basic income pilot with fewer than 100 people in Oakland last fall with the goal of gathering information to structure a larger research proposal, its director, Elizabeth Rhodes, said.

The concept has been around, with different names and in different countries, for centuries, said Karl Widerquist, co-founder of the Basic Income Earth Network.

It enjoyed a wave of U.S. popularity in the 1910s and ’20s and again in the ’60s and ’70s when it was championed by free-market economist Milton Friedman, Martin Luther King and, for a while, Richard Nixon.

It resurfaced again after the 2008 financial crisis, when soaring unemployment and corporate bailouts focused attention on the “99 percent.” The concept picked up steam in recent years as studies started predicting widespread unemployment because of automation.

Basic income has fans across the political spectrum, but for very different reasons. Libertarian backers would replace all or most welfare programs with a monthly cash payment as a way to prevent poverty, reduce government bureaucracy and let people decide for themselves how to use the money.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg (right), shown in May receiving an honorary degree from Harvard, also supports the universal income concept. Photo: Paul Marotta, Getty Images

Photo: Paul Marotta, Getty Images

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg (right), shown in May receiving an honorary degree from Harvard, also supports the universal income concept.

By contrast, “those left of center like the idea of using (basic income) as a supplement to the existing safety net,” said Natalie Foster, co-chairwoman of the Economic Security Project, a two-year fund devoted to researching and promoting the idea of unconditional cash.

In a “utopian version,” the money would “sit alongside existing programs” and go to every man, woman and child, Foster said. But if you made it enough to keep people above poverty — $1,000 a month is a popular number — “it starts to add up to a very significant portion of the GDP,” Foster said.

That’s why some proposals would reduce or eliminate payments to children or to adults over 65 if they are getting Social Security and Medicare. Some would limit the benefits going to high-income people, either directly or indirectly by raising their tax.

“In the simple model, everyone in the lower half (of the income distribution) would be a net beneficiary, everyone in the upper half would be net payers,” Widerquist said.

Charles Murray, a libertarian political scientist with the American Enterprise Institute, has proposed a basic income plan that would replace all transfer payments including welfare, food stamps, housing subsidies, the earned income tax credit, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. It would also eliminate farm subsidies and “corporate welfare.”

In exchange, each American older than 21 would get a monthly payment totaling $13,000 a year, of which $3,000 would go to health insurance. After $30,000 in earned income, a graduated tax would “reimburse” some of the grant until it dropped to $6,500 at $60,000 in income. However, the grant would never drop below $6,500 to compensate for the loss of Social Security and Medicare.

Murray admitted that many seniors get more than $6,500 worth of benefits a year from those two programs, which is why it would have to be phased in.

“What I’m proposing would actually be cheaper than the current system,” Murray said. It would give adults a “living income” and “liberate people” who are tied to a job or welfare program in a particular city because they can’t risk leaving to pursue a new opportunity.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk favors universal basic income to compensate workers displaced by automation. "I don’t think we are going to have a choice," he said at a February event in Dubai. Photo: KARIM SAHIB, AFP/Getty Images

Photo: KARIM SAHIB, AFP/Getty Images

Tesla CEO Elon Musk favors universal basic income to compensate workers displaced by automation. “I don’t think we are going to have a choice,” he said at a February event in Dubai.

Andy Stern, a senior fellow at the Economic Security Project, has proposed a “left-of-center” plan that would give every adult 18 to 64 a monthly cash payment of $1,000. It would replace welfare programs such as food stamps, the earned income tax credit, unemployment and Supplemental Security Income. But it would keep Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security disability.

He figures the plan would cost about $1.75 trillion a year. Ending welfare programs would save about a third of that. Another third could come from ending the tax deduction for mortgage interest and other write-offs. The remaining third could come from new sources such as a tax on carbon emissions or financial transactions.

Stern would not reduce payments to the rich or raise their taxes because that would bring back the problem he is trying to eliminate — determining who is “worthy and unworthy” to receive benefits. But many of the tax increases he envisions “would have a disproportionate effect on higher-income people,” he said.

Some opponents of guaranteed income say it will encourage laziness. Proponents say the current system discourages work by taking away some benefits as income goes up.

Zipcar founder Robin Chase, now a speaker and author, said universal income would encourage and reward important work that “does not get monetized,” such as child care and volunteer work. It would also spur business creation. “I had the luxury of taking risks because I had a husband who had a full-time job with health care. A majority of the population cannot take any risks in pursuing innovation or higher-value, non-remunerative things.”

Some believe the answer to income inequality and automation is not guaranteed income but a guaranteed job. Jared Bernstein, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, has said the federal government should provide a job with benefits to anyone who wants one and can’t get one. “A job guarantee could simultaneously lower un- and underemployment while providing critically needed labor in fields ranging from infrastructure to education to child and elder care,” Bernstein, who was an economist in President Barack Obama’s administration, wrote in the American Prospect.

Jason Furman, who chaired Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, doesn’t like guaranteed jobs or guaranteed income. Furman, now a professor at the Harvard Kennedy School, said universal income suffers from three problems.

“One is that it’s very hard to make the numbers add up. To get to (incomes) like $12,000, you need huge increases in taxes. Two, there are a lot of benefits to targeting. You only get unemployment if you don’t have a job and are looking for a new job. If anything, I might toughen the work search requirement” to receive unemployment.

Finally, he said, “I believe there is no reason that people can’t be employed in the future. We have thousands of years of experience of technological progress not leading” to mass unemployment. He pointed out that technologically advanced countries do not have higher unemployment rates than those that are less advanced.

“We should put more effort into how to create jobs and prepare people for jobs in the future,” he said. Universal basic income “is giving up on work and giving up on people. I’m not prepared to do that.”

Kathleen Pender is a San Francisco Chronicle columnist. 

http://www.sfchronicle.com/aboutsfgate/article/Why-universal-basic-income-is-gaining-support-11290211.php

 

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 926-929

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 916-925

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 906-915

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 889-896

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 884-888

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 878-883

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 870-877

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 864-869

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 857-863

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 850-856

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 845-849

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 840-844

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 833-839

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 827-832

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 821-826

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 815-820

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 806-814

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 800-805

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 DownloadShows 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 )

The Pronk Pops Show 917, June 22, 2017, Story 1: Senate Draft Bill To Repeal Obamacare Is Obamacare Lite! No Individual and Employer Mandates and Obamacare Taxes But Subsidies Remain — The Stupid Party Again Betrays Republican Voters By Not Repealing Obamacare Completely — Conservative and Libertarian Republicans Will Oppose Senate Draft Bill — Nothing For Trump To Sign Before Independence Day! — Videos — Story 2: More Republican Voters Will Be Leaving The Party and Become Independents — Waiting For A New Limited Government Party! — Obama Damaged Democratic Party and Trump Will Damage Republican Party — No Hope and No Change With Two Party Tyranny of Big Interventionist Government — BIG Parties — Videos

Posted on June 22, 2017. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Breaking News, Budgetary Policy, Communications, Congress, Corruption, Countries, Diet, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Economics, Education, Empires, Employment, Exercise, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Food, Food, Former President Barack Obama, Freedom of Speech, Government, Government Spending, Health, Health Care, Health Care Insurance, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton, History, House of Representatives, Human, Human Behavior, Labor Economics, Life, Lying, Media, Medicare, National Interest, News, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, President Trump, Progressives, Radio, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Regulation, Rule of Law, Security, Senate, Social Science, Tax Policy, Taxation, Taxes, Ted Cruz, Unemployment, United States of America, Videos, Wealth, Welfare Spending, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 917,  June 22, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 916,  June 21, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 915,  June 20, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 914,  June 19, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 913,  June 16, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 912,  June 15, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 911,  June 14, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 910,  June 13, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 909,  June 12, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 908,  June 9, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 907,  June 8, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 906,  June 7, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 905,  June 6, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 904,  June 5, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 903,  June 1, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 902,  May 31, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 901,  May 30, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 900,  May 25, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 899,  May 24, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 898,  May 23, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 897,  May 22, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 896,  May 18, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 895,  May 17, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 894,  May 16, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 893,  May 15, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 892,  May 12, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 891,  May 11, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 890,  May 10, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 889,  May 9, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 888,  May 8, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 887,  May 5, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 886,  May 4, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 885,  May 3, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 884,  May 1, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 883 April 28, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 882: April 27, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 881: April 26, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 880: April 25, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 879: April 24, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 878: April 21, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 877: April 20, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 876: April 19, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 875: April 18, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 874: April 17, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 873: April 13, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 872: April 12, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 871: April 11, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 870: April 10, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 869: April 7, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 868: April 6, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 867: April 5, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 866: April 3, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 865: March 31, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 864: March 30, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 863: March 29, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 862: March 28, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 861: March 27, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 860: March 24, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 859: March 23, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 858: March 22, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 857: March 21, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 856: March 20, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 855: March 10, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 854: March 9, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 853: March 8, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 852: March 6, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 851: March 3, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 850: March 2, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 849: March 1, 2017

Image result for senate draft bill does not repeal obaMACARE

Image result for CARTOONS senate draft bill does not repeal obaMACARE

Image result for branco CARTOONS senate draft bill does not repeal obaMACAREImage result for CARTOONS senate draft bill does not repeal obaMACARE

 

Story 1: Senate Draft Bill To Repeal Obamacare Is Obamacare Lite! No Individual and Employer Mandates and Obamacare Taxes But Subsidies Remain — The Stupid Party Again Betrays Republican Voters By Not Repealing Obamacare Completely — Conservative and Libertarian Republicans Will Oppose Senate Draft Bill — Nothing For Trump To Sign Before Independence Day! — Videos

Image result for ludwig von mises on government intervention into marketsImage result for ludwig von mises on government intervention into markets

“Once the principle is admitted that it is the duty of the government to protect the individual against his own foolishness, no serious objections can be advanced against further encroachments.”

“The champions of socialism call themselves progressives, but they recommend a system which is characterized by rigid observance of routine and by a resistance to every kind of improvement. They call themselves liberals, but they are intent upon abolishing liberty. They call themselves democrats, but they yearn for dictatorship. They call themselves revolutionaries, but they want to make the government omnipotent. They promise the blessings of the Garden of Eden, but they plan to transform the world into a gigantic post office. Every man but one a subordinate clerk in a bureau.”
~ Ludwig von Mises

Image result for four gop senators opposed to senate draft of repeal and replace

Image result for four gop senators opposed to senate draft of repeal and replace

 

Image result for List of pre-existing conditions

Image result for List of pre-existing conditions

Image result for four gop senators opposed to senate draft of repeal and replace

Senators Debate GOP Health Care Plan

GOP health care plan faces opposition

GOP health care bill will ruin the Republican Party: Ann Coulter

Rand Paul: Insurance Should Be Available For $1 A Day | Morning Joe | MSNBC

Senate Republicans unveil a bill to repeal Obamacare

Senate Republicans’ health care bill already in jeopardy?

Is the Senate GOP healthcare bill dead on arrival?

Why Mitch McConnell May Not Put Health Care To Vote | Morning Joe | MSNBC

GOP Health Care Bill Update (6/22/2017)

Ted Cruz: Senate GOP Healthcare Bill Doesn’t Lower Costs

Rand Paul on Senate GOP Healthcare Bill: ‘I Didn’t Run on Obamacare-Lite’

Senate health care bill to be released today

ObamaCare Is In A Death Spiral

Rush Limbaugh [Free Video] Republicans Dont Want to Repeal Obamacare

I’ve covered Obamacare since day one. I’ve never seen lying and obstruction like this.

Sen. Chris Murphy: Senate Health Care is ‘Dumber and ‘More Evil’ Than House Proposal

What’s in the Senate GOP health bill?

4 GOP senators, including Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, come out against Senate healthcare bill —

The Differences among Liberals, Conservatives and Libertarians (Robert A. Levy)

Freedom Caucus Calls For Complete Repeal Of The Affordable Care Act

Dr. Siegel breaks down the pre-existing conditions challenge

NEW: Tucker Carlson + Rand Paul Discuss Repealing/Replacing Obamacare

Image result for ludwig von mises on government intervention into markets

 

Here are the details of Senate Republican Obamacare replacement bill

  • The bill would significantly change how the federal government subsidizes individual health plans and funds Medicaid
  • GOP leaders want to have a vote on the bill before the Fourth of July recess.
  • The House’s own version of a health-care bill is deeply unpopular.
Dan Mangan | Kayla Tausche

Senate Minority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)

Former Medicare administrator: Millions will still lose coverage under Senate health-care bill  6 Hours Ago | 03:20

Senate GOP leaders on Thursday finally released their secret health-care reform bill, which would repeal Obamacare taxes, restructure subsidies to insurance customers, and both phase out Medicaid’s expansion program and cap Medicaid spending.

Republicans plan to bring the controversial bill that was drafted in secret to a quick vote next week, but face potentially fatal opposition to it from several members of their own caucus.

The 142-page bill, if passed into law, would sharply reduce financial aid that currently helps millions of people obtain health coverage, while at the same time offering a tax break to primarily wealthy Americans to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. And it would loosen rules in a way that could lead to states allowing insurers to offer less-generous health plans.

The bill would repeal, retroactive to the beginning of 2016, the Obamacare rule requiring most Americans to have some form of health coverage or pay a tax penalty fine. That repeal is expected to sharply increase the number of people who don’t have insurance, which could in turn lead insurers to raise premiums.

And it would repeal, retroactively to the beginning of 2016, the “employer mandate,” which requires large employers to offer health insurance to workers or be fined.

Read the entire bill here

The bill also would continue for at least two years to offer reimbursements to health insurance companies for subsidies that reduce out-of-pocket costs for low income customers of Obamacare plans. But those subsidies would end in 2020, which would increase deductibles and other out-of-pocket health expenses for millions of customers.

The federal government’s share of funding for Medicaid, which is jointly run with individual states, would fall over the course of seven years to end up at around 57 percent of the cost of that program, which offers health coverage to the poor.

Under Obamacare, the federal government had guaranteed that its funding for adults newly eligible for Medicaid because of the Affordable Care Act would fall to no lower than 90 percent of their costs. That expansion program would begin being phased out in 2021, and fully repealed by three years later.

In another cost-cutting move, the bill would lower the maximum income level a household could have to still qualify for federal subsidies that help reduce the premiums people pay for enrollment for individual health plans. Obamacare currently bars subsidies to families that earn more than 400 percent of the federal poverty level. The new bill would reduce that cap to 350 percent of the poverty level.

Younger people, as a group, would end up paying less of a share of their income toward their individual health plans under the bill in comparison to what they pay now under Obamacare, while older people as a group would end up paying a larger share of their income.

Health plans that offer abortion services would not be eligible for the subsidies, according to the draft released Thursday.

The federal government also would end up spending less money subsidizing people’s insurance purchases by changing how the value of those subsidies are calculated. The bill would use a less-expensive type of individual health plan to calculate those subsidies, as opposed to the pricier plan used under Obamacare.

The bill also seeks to repeal, to the start of 2017, the 3.8 percent tax on net investment income.

The Trump administration is expected to back the bill, which most GOP senators were learning the details of during a meeting Thursday morning. The bill is named the “Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017.”

“It’s going to be very good,” President Donald Trump said about an hour after the bill’s release. “A little negotiation, but it’s going to be very good.” Trump did not elaborate.

The House’s version of the bill, dubbed the American Health Care Act, is broadly unpopular among the public, and had been reportedly called “mean, mean, mean,” by Trump during a meeting with senators. Weeks earlier, Trump and House members who voted for the ACHA celebrated its passage in the Rose Garden of the White House.

A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll released Thursday found that just 16 percent of Americans thought the House bill was a good idea, with 48 percent saying it is a bad idea.

“In broad strokes, the Senate bill is just like the House: Big tax cuts, big cut in federal heath spending, big increase in the uninsured,” tweeted Larry Levitt, an Obamacare expert at the Kaiser Family Foundation.

“Under the Senate bill, low-income people would pay higher premiums for bigger deductibles,” Levitt said.

He had noted on Twitter on Wednesday that “A 60 year-old at 351% of poverty currently gets a premium subsidy of $5,151 per year on average.” The Senate bill would eliminate all of that federal financial aid if it becomes law.

Senate GOP leaders want to have a vote on the bill by late next week, before Congress’ Fourth of July recess. They do not plan to hold any hearings on the legislation, infuriating Democrats, who were frozen out of the drafting process.

To pass, Republicans must get at least 50 GOP senators to vote for the bill, since no Democrat or independent is expected to vote for it. Vice President Mike Pence would break any tie, and would be expected to vote for the bill. There are 52 Republican senators.

On Thursday, about an hour after the bill was posted online, NBC’s Chuck Todd tweeted that a group of a conservative Republican senators were meeting, and that there are at least three GOP senators, and possibly more, who plan to announce later today that they will oppose the bill.

If that number proves to be accurate, it could be a death blow to the bill.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., told NBC that he and several other members of the GOP caucus would be making a statement on the bill later Thursday.

“It looks like we’re keeping Obamacare, not repealing it,” said Paul, who declined to say whether that meant he would vote against the bill.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Ky., center, followed by Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas, leaves a Republican meeting on healthcare, Thursday, June 22, 2017, on Capitol Hill in Washington.

Jacquelyn Martin | AP
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Ky., center, followed by Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas, leaves a Republican meeting on healthcare, Thursday, June 22, 2017, on Capitol Hill in Washington.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Thursday, “There will be ample time to analyze” and discuss the bill before the legislation is put to a vote.

While McConnell praised the bill on the floor of the Senate, many of his Republican caucus members avoided speaking with reporters staking them out in Congress, who wanted to ask about the legislation.

Democrats promptly blasted the bill, and castigated Republicans for planning to call a vote on it just a week after its details were released.

“The Republicans want to give a tax break to the wealthiest Americans,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, on the floor of the Senate after release of the bill. “Simply put this bill will result in higher costs, less care, and millions of Americans will lose their health insurance.”

“It’s every bit as bad as the House bill. In many ways it’s even worse,” Schumer said. “The Senate bill is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, but this wolf has even sharper teeth than the House bill.”

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., during a press conference said, “From what I understand, their bill tracks along lines of House bill … [I] think that’s very good.”

Leslie Dach, director of the Obamacare-supporting group Protect Our Care Campaign, tore into the Senate’s bill, which, like Ryan, he compared to the House’s earlier bill.

“Senate Republicans promised to start over and write a plan that improves people’s health care,” Dach said. “Instead they doubled down on the failed House repeal approach that puts everyone’s health care last, and tax breaks for the wealthy first.”

“The heartless Senate health care repeal bill makes health care worse for everyone — it raises costs, cuts coverage, weakens protections and cuts even more from Medicaid than the mean House bill,” said Dach, who had served as senior counselor at the Department of Health and Human Services in the Obama administration.

“They wrote their plan in secret and are rushing forward with a vote next week because they know how much harm their bill does to millions of people.”

But Seema Verma, administrator for the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, praised the Senate’s bill as she criticized Obamacare, a program that CMS oversees.

“I appreciate the work of the Senate as they continue to make progress fixing the crisis in health care that has resulted from Obamacare,” Verma said. “Skyrocketing premiums, rising costs and fewer choices have caused too many Americans to drop their insurance coverage.”

“Today, Obamacare is in a death spiral and millions ofAmericans are being negatively impacted as a result. They are trapped by mandates that force them to purchase insurance they don’t want and can’t afford,” she said. “The Senate proposal is built on putting patients first and in charge of their health-care decisions, bringing down the cost of coverage and expanding choices. Congress must act now to achieve the President’s goal to make sure all Americans have access to quality, affordable coverage.”

The Congressional Budget Office said it expects to release an analysis of the bill early next week Monday. The analysis will estimate how many people are likely to become uninsured in the next decade if the bill becomes law, as well as how premiums for individual health plans would be affected.

CBO aims to release estimate for Senate health care plan early next week https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52843 

CBO aims to release estimate for Senate health care plan early next week

CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation are in the process of preparing an estimate for the Senate health care plan and aim to release it early next week.

cbo.gov

The CBO “score” would also include projections on the bill’s impact on federal spending.

The release of the draft comes more than six weeks after GOP leaders in the House barely managed to win passage for their own health-care legislation.

The House bill, the American Health Care Act, is widely unpopular, multiple polls have shown.

The nonpartisan CBO, in analyzing that bill, found that 23 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2026 if it became law than if Obamacare remained in place.

While many of those people would voluntarily cease buying insurance plans because of the elimination requirement that they have some form of health coverage or pay a fine, millions more would find their plans unaffordable because of either rising prices, the loss of government subsidies or both factors.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/22/senate-republicans-finally-unveil-their-big-obamacare-replacement-bill.html

Track the Key Changes in the GOP’s Health Plan

By Hannah Recht, Zachary Tracer and Mira Rojanasakul

Published: March 22, 2017 | Last updated: June 22, 2017
Seven years after the Affordable Care Act was enacted, Republicans are trying to follow through on their promises to repeal and replace Obamacare. On March 6, Republican House leaders introduced their health plan, and Senate Republicans followed with their own bill on June 22. Congress will need to reconcile differences in the two proposals before a bill can reach President Donald Trump’s desk. We’ll track major policy changes and their impacts as Congress drafts and revises legislation to repeal Obamacare.
House bill introduced [March 6] ⟶ First House amendments [March 20] ⟶ First House vote canceled [March 24] ⟶ Passes House [May 4] ⟶ Senate bill introduced [June 22] ⟶ Passes Senate ⟶ House and Senate negotiate and revise bill ⟶ House and Senate pass final bill ⟶ President signs, becomes law
Medicaid Financing
House billCHANGE
House bill introduced  |  March 6, 2017

Currently, the federal government generally reimburses states for a fixed percentage of Medicaid expenditures, regardless of total spending or number of enrollees. The GOP bill would limit Medicaid reimbursement by a per-enrollee cost, based on 2016 average costs.

House amendment  |  March 20, 2017

Allows states to choose from two formulas for how they get federal Medicaid funding, and boosts the funding for elderly and disabled Medicaid enrollees, relative to the initial bill.

Senate billCHANGE
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

Like the House bill, the Senate bill would allow states to choose between two formulas for federal Medicaid funding. But starting in 2025, the Senate bill would set a lower funding growth rate than the House bill would, meaning states would receive less money. Certain Medicaid enrollees would not be subject to these limits, including people with disabilities and children.

Budget impact: In the House bill, Federal Medicaid spending would decrease by $834 billion, from 2017 to 2026, relative to current law.

Decrease in Medicaid spending from current law, House bill
Source: Congressional Budget Office
Medicaid Expansion
House billREPEAL
House bill introduced  |  March 6, 2017

The ACA allowed states to expand Medicaid to individuals making as much as 138 percent of the federal poverty level, with federal funding. The GOP bill winds down Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion starting in 2020.

House amendment  |  March 20, 2017

Won’t provide extra funding to states that newly expand Medicaid.

Senate billREPEAL
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

Medicaid expansion funding would be phased out between 2021 and 2024.

Human impact: In the House bill, Medicaid enrollment would decrease by 14 million people by 2026, about 17 percent.

Decrease in Medicaid enrollment from current law, House bill

0M

–3

–6

–9

–12

–15

Source: Congressional Budget Office
Premium Subsidies
House billCHANGE
House bill introduced  |  March 6, 2017

The ACA introduced subsidies based on income and the cost of health insurance, with some help available to people making up to 400 percent of the poverty level, or about $47,000 for an individual. The House bill would base subsidies mainly on age, phasing out funding beginning at an income of $75,000 for an individual.

Senate billCHANGE
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

The Senate bill would maintain the ACA’s subsidies through 2019, but change how subsidies are allocated starting in 2020. The ACA calculates subsidies based on a mid-level coverage plan, while the Senate bill would use a cheaper type of plan. Subsidies would no longer be available to those above 350 percent of the poverty level, or about $42,000 for an individual.

Human impact: Many low-income subsidy recipients would lose thousands in premium subsidies, particularly older enrollees in higher-cost areas. In the House bill, some people who currently earn too much to qualify for subsidies would receive new assistance. The Senate bill does not offer similar assistance. Instead, it would place additional limits on who qualifies for subsidy assistance, making some middle-class recipients who currently receive subsidies ineligible.

Source: Congressional Budget Office
Essential Health Benefits
House billCHANGE
House amendment  |  March 23, 2017

The ACA requires health insurance plans to cover 10 broad categories of essential health benefits, as well as to provide preventive services at no cost. The bill initially left the requirement intact, but an amendment that would repeal that requirement was added. Instead, states will define their own list of benefits that are required for plans receiving premium subsidies beginning Jan. 1, 2018.

House amendment  |  May 3, 2017

An amendment was added that would leave essential health benefits intact—reinstating the federal standard. Instead, states could opt out of the requirement and apply for a waiver to define their own list of benefits that are required for plans receiving premium subsidies beginning Jan. 1, 2020.

Senate billCHANGE
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

Senate bill adopts changes in House bill.

Human impact: The Congressional Budget Office expects that half of the U.S. population live in states that would waive some required benefits. Plans in these states would likely have lower premiums, but they would cover less. For instance, maternity care premiums could cost an additional $1,000 per month or more. Customers seeking comprehensive coverage could face premiums and out-of-pocket charges that are significantly higher than under current law.

Budget impact: Insurers in some states could offer plans with such limited coverage that CBO does not consider them health insurance. Those plans would still be eligible for millions of dollars in federal subsidies.

Source: Congressional Budget Office
Pre-existing Conditions
House billCHANGE
House amendment  |  May 3, 2017

The ACA requires health insurers to sell plans to individuals who are sick with so-called pre-existing conditions and not charge them more than healthy customers. An amendment would allow states to apply for a waiver that would let insurers charge higher premiums to people with pre-existing conditions that had a gap in coverage of at least 63 days in the prior year. To do so, states would have to establish some method (a special “high-risk” insurance pool, or subsidies) to help sick people.

Senate billNO CHANGE
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

Insurance companies would not be allowed to charge customers with pre-existing conditions more than healthy customers.

Human impact: In states that allow insurers to charge people with pre-existing conditions more than healthy people, those less healthy individuals would face increasingly prohibitive premiums under the House bill. Eventually, the CBO predicts, less-healthy people may not be able to afford any coverage.

Source: Congressional Budget Office
Age Rating
House billCHANGE
House bill introduced  |  March 6, 2017

Obamacare lets health insurers charge their oldest customers no more than three times as much as their youngest ones. The GOP bill introduced widens the ratio to 5 to 1.

House amendment  |  March 20, 2017

Adds a provision that would let the Senate decide whether to increase subsidies that go to older Americans.

House amendment  |  May 3, 2017

Adds a provision that would allow states to apply for a waiver to give insurers permission to charge older customers even more than the 5 to 1 ratio.

Senate billCHANGE
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

Senate bill adopts changes in House bill.

Human impact: Premiums would significantly rise for older people and decrease for younger people. Low-income older adults would face much higher premiums than under current law, even with federal subsidies.

Source: Congressional Budget Office
State Grants
House billNEW
House bill introduced  |  March 6, 2017

Includes a new $100 billion fund designed to help states stabilize their individual health insurance markets or help low-income people get health care.

House amendment  |  March 23, 2017

Adds $15 billion to the fund to be used for maternity, newborn, mental health and substance abuse coverage.

House amendment  |  April 6, 2017

Adds $15 billion for the Federal Invisible Risk Sharing Program, designed to help insurers cover the costs of sick and expensive patients.

House amendment  |  May 3, 2017

Adds $8 billion in funding from 2018 through 2023 to help individuals afford higher premiums in states that let insurers charge sick people more.

Senate billNEW
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

The Senate bill would include $112 billion in state grant funds, primarily to stabilize state insurance markets and cover expensive patients. It would also allocate $2 billion in 2018 for substance abuse treatment.

Human impact: The grants would lead to slightly lower premiums in the individual market and encourage insurer participation. The new funding would not be enough to significantly lower costs for people with pre-existing conditions.

Budget impact: Both bills would require more than $100 billion in additional federal spending.

Source: Congressional Budget Office
Medicaid Work Requirements
House billNEW
House amendment  |  March 20, 2017

Gives states the option of requiring some Medicaid recipients to work or pursue job training.

Senate billNEW
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

Senate bill adopts changes in House bill.

Human impact: According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, 10 million non-elderly adult Medicaid recipients who don’t receive Social Security are not working. Some of these adults would be excluded from work requirements due to disability, pregnancy or caretaker status, but many would be expected to complete job training or find employment in order to keep their insurance.

Source: Kaiser Family Foundation
Insurance Mandates
House billREPEAL
House bill introduced  |  March 6, 2017

The House bill ends Obamacare’s requirement that individuals have health coverage and that most employers offer it. Instead, when people who’ve gone uninsured decide to buy health insurance, they’ll have to pay a 30 percent surcharge on their premiums for one year.

Senate billREPEAL
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

The Senate bill ends Obamacare’s requirement that individuals have health coverage and that most employers offer it.

Human impact: Though about 1 million people are expected to buy insurance in 2018 in order to avoid future surcharges, twice as many would choose not to purchase insurance long-term because of the House bill surcharge or insurance documentation requirements.

Budget impact: Revenue loss of $210 billion from 2017 to 2026 from repealing insurance penalties. The new premium surcharge would go to insurers directly, not the government.

Source: Congressional Budget Office
Planned Parenthood and Abortion Care
House billNEW
House bill introduced  |  March 6, 2017

Ends all federal funding for Planned Parenthood for one year. The bill also prohibits federal funds from going to insurance plans that cover abortions, other than those necessary to save the life of the woman, or in cases of rape or incest.

House amendment  |  March 20, 2017

Adds additional safeguards to prevent government funds from being used for some abortions.

Senate billNEW
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

Senate bill adopts changes in House bill.

Human impact: Several thousand Medicaid-covered births would occur because of the loss of Planned Parenthood contraceptive and abortion care, particularly among women in areas without other providers that serve low-income patients.

Budget impact: Direct spending would decrease by $234 million between 2017 and 2026, but new births due to the Planned Parenthood provision would increase Medicaid spending by $77 million over the same period.

Source: Congressional Budget Office
Individual Taxes
House billREPEAL
House bill introduced  |  March 6, 2017

Repeals a 0.9 percent Medicare payroll surtax and a 3.8 percent investment-income tax on wealthy individuals that were introduced in the ACA, effective 2018.

House amendment  |  March 20, 2017

Ends the taxes in 2017, rather than 2018.

House amendment  |  March 23, 2017

Postpones repeal of the additional Medicare tax to 2023.

Senate billREPEAL
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

Senate bill adopts changes in House bill.

Human impact: Wealthy individuals would get a tax break. In counties that backed Trump, taxpayers would save $6.6 billion, while taxpayers in Clinton counties would save $21.6 billion.

Budget impact: From 2017 to 2026, the repeal would lose $172 billion in Net Investment Tax revenue and about $64 billion in Medicare tax revenue from 2023 to 2026. Repealing the Medicare tax in 2017 would have resulted in an additional $63 billion loss.

Source: Congressional Budget Office
Industry Taxes
House billREPEAL
House bill introduced  |  March 6, 2017

Repeals ACA taxes imposed on health insurers, pharmaceutical companies, medical-device companies and tanning salons, effective 2018.

House amendment  |  March 20, 2017

Ends the taxes in 2017, rather than 2018.

Senate billREPEAL
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

Repeals most taxes immediately. A tax on providers would be phased out in 2025.

Budget impact: Loss of $199 billion in tax revenue from 2017 to 2026.

Tax revenue lost, 2017–2026
Source: Congressional Budget Office
Cadillac Tax
House billCHANGE
House bill introduced  |  March 6, 2017

Obamacare imposes a tax on very generous health insurance benefits, which was delayed to 2020. The bill introduced further pushes the tax back to 2025.

House amendment  |  March 20, 2017

Delays the tax to 2026.

Senate billCHANGE
Senate bill introduced  |  June 22, 2017

Senate bill adopts changes in House bill.

Budget impact: Loss of $66 billion in tax revenue through 2026.

Tax revenue lost

$0B

–3

–6

–9

–12

–15

Source: Congressional Budget Office
Dependent Coverage
No proposed change to current law

The ACA requires health insurers to allow children to remain on their parents’ plans, up to age 26.

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-healthcare-bill-changes/

The C, D, and F Rollover Republicans Want To Keep Obamacare Subsidies

This Is Not Repeal But Extending Obamacare

 

Conservative Review Scorecard of Senators

https://www.conservativereview.com/scorecard?chamber=senate&state=&party=R

 

 

Story 2: More Republican Voters Will Be Leaving The Party and Become Independents — Waiting For A New Limited Government Party! — Obama Damaged Democratic Party and Trump Will Damage Republican Party — No Hope and No Change With Two Party Tyranny of BIG Interventionist Government Parties — Videos

 

How the Republican Party went from Lincoln to Trump

From white supremacy to Barack Obama: The history of the Democratic Party

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 916-917

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 906-915

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 889-896

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 884-888

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 878-883

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 870-877

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 864-869

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 857-863

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 850-856

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 845-849

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 840-844

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 833-839

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 827-832

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 821-826

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 815-820

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 806-814

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 800-805

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 DownloadShows 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 )

The Pronk Pops Show 845, February 23, 2017, Story 1: The Laurel & Hardy or Priebus & Bannon of Big Government Conservative PAC Meet and Greet — Old Wine in Old Bottles — A Movement Is Not A Viable Party — After Eight Years The Republican Party Cannot Repeal Obamacare and Replace The Income Tax With The FairTax On Day One — Status Quo Business As Usual — Delay, Delay, Delay — Millennials Missing Milo –Videos

Posted on February 24, 2017. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Congress, Corruption, Countries, Crime, Culture, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Education, Empires, Employment, Government Spending, History, House of Representatives, Human, Illegal Drugs, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Islamic Republic of Iran, Islamic State, Legal Immigration, Life, Media, News, Photos, Politics, Polls, President Trump, Senate, Unemployment, United States of America, Videos, Violence, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 845: February 23, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 844: February 22, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 843: February 21, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 842: February 20, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 841: February 17, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 840: February 16, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 839: February 15, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 838: February 14, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 837: February 13, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 836: February 10, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 835: February 9, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 834: February 8, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 833: February 7, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 832: February 6, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 831: February 3, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 830: February 2, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 829: February 1, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 828: January 31, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 827: January 30, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 826: January 27, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 825: January 26, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 824: January 25, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 823: January 24, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 822: January 23, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 821: January 20, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 820: January 19, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 819: January 18, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 818: January 17, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 817: January 13, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 816: January 12, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 815: January 11, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 814: January 10, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 813: January 9, 2017

Pronk Pops Show 812: December 12, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 811: December 9, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 810: December 8, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 809: December 7, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 808: December 6, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 807: December 5, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 806: December 2, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 805: December 1, 2016

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

Story 1: The Laurel &amp; Hardy or Priebus &amp; Bannon of Big Government Conservative PAC Meet and Greet —  Old Wine in Old Bottles — A Movement Is Not A Viable Party — After Eight Years The Republican Party Cannot Repeal Obamacare and Replace The Income Tax With The FairTax On Day One — Status Quo Business As Usual — Delay, Delay, Delay — Millennials Missing Milo –Videos
Image result for steve bannon and rhyes prebiusImage result for laurel and hardy

Image result for steve bannon and rhyes prebius

Image result for cartoons steve bannon

Image result for cartoons steve bannonImage result for cartoons steve bannonImage result for laurel and hardyImage result for cartoon Milo YiannopoulosImage result for cartoons steve bannonImage result for cartoons steve bannon

Laurel & Hardy Best Clips

Steve Bannon & Reince Priebus At CPAC 2017 Conference [23/2/17]

CPAC 2017 – Mark Levin and Sen. Ted Cruz

CPAC 2017 – The States vs The State Governors Panel

CPAC 2017 – Kellyanne Conway

The Milo Yiannopoulos scandal is a coordinated hit job (CPAC 2017)

Published on Feb 20, 2017

Sexual comments by Breitbart writer Milo Yiannopoulous was brought to light this week, causing his speech at CPAC 2017 to be cancelled along with his “Dangerous” book title, which was to be published by Simon & Schuster. These attacks contain fingerprints from the establishment.

UPDATE: He resigned from Breitbart (http://www.breitbart.com/big-journali…)

My controversial article “How To Stop Rape”: http://www.rooshv.com/how-to-stop-rap…

How To Destroy The Establishment Media: http://www.rooshv.com/how-to-destroy-…

The Culture War Is Being Transformed Into A Hot War: http://www.rooshv.com/the-culture-war…

My book Free Speech Isn’t Free tells the story of how I was attacked by the establishment: http://amzn.to/2l2BxZR

Adam Carolla on Milo Yiannopoulos Controversy, Press Conference & Resignation

Milo Yiannopoulos Interview | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO)

Why Men Are Better At Everything Ever: Steven Crowder & Milo Yiannopoulos

Milo Yiannopoulos DESTROYS Emotional Liberal On Donald Trump

MILO YIANNOPOULOS CRUSHES A FEMINIST

CNN TRIES TO SLANDER MILO…AND FAILS

Milo and CPAC

Milo Yiannopoulos Explains His Controversial Comments And CPAC On Facebook Live

PRESS CONFERENCE: Milo Yiannopoulos Resigns from Breitbart, Tells Story of Past Sexual Abuse (FNN)

THE MILO SEX CLIP THAT GOT HIM IN TROUBLE! Listen and Judge for Yourself!!

Milo Yiannopoulos, Steven Crowder and Christina Hoff Sommers at UMass

BBC Tries to Ambush Milo…With Exactly The Result You’d Expect

MILO At UC – Colorado Springs: Why The Dems Lost The White Working Class

MILO OBLITERATES Student Who Called Him A “White Supremacist”

MILO Thrashes Heckling Muslim Women At New Mexico

MILO On Climate Change And “Post Truth” Politics

Conservative Political Action Conference

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Conservative Political Action Conference
CPAC logo 2017.png

The official logo for CPAC 2017
Dates March (dates vary)
Frequency Annual
Location(s) National Harbor, Maryland, U.S.
Inaugurated 1973; 44 years ago
Next event February 22 – 25, 2017
Organized by American Conservative Union
Website
cpac.conservative.org

The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC; /ˈspæk/ see-pak) is an annual political conference attended by conservative activists and elected officials from across the United States. CPAC is hosted by the American Conservative Union (ACU).[1] More than 100 other organizations contribute in various ways.

In 2011, ACU took CPAC on the road with its first Regional CPAC in Orlando, Florida. Since then ACU has hosted regional CPACs in Chicago, Denver, St. Louis, and San Diego. Political front runners take the stage at this convention.

Speakers have included Ronald Reagan,[2][3][4] George W. Bush,[5] Dick Cheney,[6] Pat Buchanan,[7] Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich,[5] Sarah Palin, Ron Paul,[8] Mitt Romney,[5] Tony Snow,[5] Glenn Beck,[9] Rush Limbaugh,[10] Ann Coulter,[6] Allen West,[11] Michele Bachmann,[12] Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Donald Trump,[13] Gary Johnson, and other conservative public figures.

History

Number of CPAC attendees over time

Donald Trump speaking at the 2011 CPAC

Ann Coulter speaking at the 2011 CPAC

The conference was founded in 1973 by the American Conservative Union and Young Americans for Freedom as a small gathering of dedicated conservatives.[14][15] The 2010 CPAC featured co-sponsorship for the first time from the John Birch Society and GOProud. The Ronald Reagan Award was given to the Tea Party movement, which marked the first time it was ever given to a group instead of an individual.[16][17][18] The 2011 CPAC was Donald Trump’s first speaking appearance at CPAC. His appearance at CPAC was organized by GOProud, in conjunction with GOPround supporter Roger Stone, who was close with Trump. GOPround pushed for a write-in campaign for Donald Trump at CPAC’s presidential straw poll. Christopher R. Barron, co-founder of GOProud who would later not only endorse Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, but also launch LGBT for Trump, said he “would love to see Mr. Trump run for president.” For the 2012 CPAC conference, the ACU board voted to not invite GOProud or the John Birch Society to the 2012 conference.[19] The 2011 CPAC speech Trump gave is credited for helping kick-start his political career within the Republican Party.[20][21][22] The 2015 CPAC featured Jamila Bey who became the first atheist activist to address CPAC’s annual meeting.[23] The 2016 CPAC featured co-sponsorship for the first time from the Log Cabin Republicans.[24]

Controversies

In 2014, CPAC extended an invitation to the American Atheists, which was immediately withdrawn on the same day due to controversial statements.[25]

In 2017, CPAC extended an invitation to conservative blogger Milo Yiannopoulos to speak at the event, despite his history of inflammatory and controversial views[26] on feminism, racial minorities, and transgender people. Yiannopoulos had previously been banned from Twitter after allegedly inciting racial and sexual harassment towards SNL cast member Leslie Jones. The invitation was cancelled when tapes surfaced[27] in which Yiannopoulos is heard making comments interpreted as defending sexual relationships between adult men and younger boys, though he later claimed to be joking. Milo admits that he was sexually abused at the age of 13 and apologized stating that he was vehemently opposed to sexual predation and that his style of flippant provocateur was not meant to marginalize the extreme subject matter.[28]

Straw poll

Straw poll results at the 2015 CPAC in National Harbor, Maryland on February 28, 2015.

The annual CPAC straw poll vote traditionally serves as a barometer for the feelings of the conservative movement. During the conference, attendees are encouraged to fill out a survey that asks questions on a variety of issues. The questions regarding the most popular possible presidential candidates are the most widely reported. One component of CPAC is evaluating conservative candidates for president, and the straw poll serves generally to quantify conservative opinion.

Year Straw Poll Winner  % of Votes Second Place  % of Votes
1976 Ronald Reagan[29][30] George Wallace
1980 Ronald Reagan
1984 Ronald Reagan
1986 Jack Kemp[31][32] George H.W. Bush
1987 Jack Kemp[33] 68% Patrick Buchanan 9%
1993 Jack Kemp[34]
1995 Phil Gramm[35] 40% Bob Dole 12%
1998 Steve Forbes[36] 23% George W. Bush 10%
1999 Gary Bauer[37][38] 28% George W. Bush 24%
2000 George W. Bush[39] 42% Alan Keyes 23%
2005 Rudy Giuliani[40] 19% Condoleezza Rice 18%
2006 George Allen[41] 22% John McCain 20%
2007 Mitt Romney[41] 21% Rudy Giuliani 17%
2008 Mitt Romney[41] 35% John McCain 34%
2009 Mitt Romney[41][42] 20% Bobby Jindal 14%
2010 Ron Paul[41][43] 31% Mitt Romney 22%
2011 Ron Paul[44] 30% Mitt Romney 23%
2012 Mitt Romney[45] 38% Rick Santorum 31%
2013 Rand Paul[46] 25% Marco Rubio 23%
2014 Rand Paul[47] 31% Ted Cruz 11%
2015 Rand Paul 26% Scott Walker 21%
2016 Ted Cruz 40% Marco Rubio 30%

Overall, Mitt Romney holds the record of winning more CPAC straw polls than any other individual, with four. Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp and Rand Paul follow with three consecutive wins each, followed by Ron Paul with two wins. Of these five, the Pauls are the only two to win more than one straw poll, yet never appear on a Republican presidential ticket in any election (although Ron Paul did receive one Electoral College vote in 2016).[48]

Awards

Every year there are several awards given to notable conservatives. Although the exact lineup of awards varies, five awards are usually presented:

  • The “Ronald Reagan Award” is the highest award given at CPAC. It is awarded to dedicated activists, regardless of how high their profile may be on a national scale. ACU director David Keene described the award in 2008: “The winners of this award, our highest honor, are not household names, but the men and women working in the trenches who sacrifice and, in so doing, set an example for others.”[49] This award is different from the Ronald Reagan Freedom Award, which is not affiliated with CPAC.
  • The “Jeane Kirkpatrick Academic Freedom Award” is presented annually in honor of Jeane Kirkpatrick. Kirkpatrick was affiliated with the American Conservative Union for many years.
  • “Defender of the Constitution Award”
  • The “Blogger of the Year Award” is given to a leading conservative member of the blogosphere.
  • The “Charlton Heston Courage Under Fire Award” is named after the late actor and political activist Charlton Heston.

Sponsors

The 2017 CPAC sponsors were the following:[50]

Exhibitors

The 2017 CPAC exhibitors were the following:[50]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Political_Action_Conference

Milo Yiannopoulos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“Yiannopoulos” redirects here. For the American law professor, see A. N. Yiannopoulos. For other uses, see Giannopoulos (disambiguation).
Milo Yiannopoulos
Next14 Day1 pic by Thomas Fedra (14132414383) (cropped).jpg

Yiannopoulos in 2014
Born Milo Hanrahan
18 October 1984 (age 32)
Kent, England
Residence United Kingdom
Nationality British
Other names Milo Andreas Wagner
Occupation Journalist, author
Years active 2007–present
Website yiannopoulos.net
Writing career
Pen name Milo Andreas Wagner (2007)

Milo Yiannopoulos (/jəˈnɒpᵿləs/;[1] born Milo Hanrahan; 18 October 1984)[2] is a British journalist and public speaker, and a former senior editor for Breitbart News. He wrote previously using the pseudonymMilo Andreas Wagner.[3][4] He has become a symbol of the No Platform movement of banning controversial speakers,[5] and is regarded as a provocateur.[6]

Yiannopoulos co-founded The Kernel in 2011, an online tabloid magazine about technology, which he sold to Daily Dot Media in 2014. He wrote about the Gamergate controversy. As a self-proclaimed “cultural libertarian[7] and “free speech fundamentalist”, he is a vocal critic of fourth-wave feminism,[8]Islam, social justice, political correctness, and other movements and ideologies he deems authoritarian or belonging to the “regressive left“. Yiannopoulos considers himself a reporter of and “occasional fellow traveller” with the alt-right movement.[9]

He was permanently banned from Twitter in July 2016 for what the company cited as “inciting or engaging in the targeted abuse or harassment of others”.[10][11][12] He resigned from Breitbart after a controversy arising from a leaked Youtube clip in which he defended sexual relationships between 13-year old boys and adult men and women as “consensual.”

Early and personal life

Yiannopoulos was born and raised in Kent in southern England.[13][14] His father is of half Greek and half Irish descent, while his mother is British.[15][16][17] His parents divorced while he was young and he was raised by his mother and her second husband, with whom he did not have a good relationship. Yiannopoulos described his father as “terrifying” and remarking upon his family’s wealth he said, “I would think, if my dad is just a doorman, why do we have such a nice house? Then I saw it on The Sopranos.”[16] As a teenager, Yiannopoulos lived with his grandmother, who regularly took him for high tea at Claridge’s.[16]

He is a practisingCatholic; Yiannopoulos has said that his maternal grandmother is Jewish,[18][19] which has put him at odds with neo-Nazi elements of the alt-right.[20] He was educated at Simon Langton Grammar School for Boys and attended the University of Manchester, dropping out without graduating.[21] He then attended Wolfson College, Cambridge, where he studied English literature for two years before dropping out. Regarding dropping out of university, in a 2012 interview he said “I try to tell myself I’m in good company, but ultimately it doesn’t say great things about you unless you go on to terrific success in your own right.”[22]

Career and politics

Milo Yiannopoulos (2013)

Yiannopoulos originally intended to write theatre criticism, but became interested in technology journalism whilst investigating women in computing for The Daily Telegraph in 2009.[8]He appeared on Sky News discussing social media,[23] and on BBC Breakfast discussing Pope Benedict XVI‘s visit to the United Kingdom.[24]

Yiannopoulos has debated same-sex marriage on Newsnight,[25] and on Channel 4‘s 10 O’Clock Live with Boy George.[26] He opposed the provision of “Soho masses“.[27]

In November 2013, he debated with singer Will Young on Newsnight about the use of the word “gay” in the playground,[28] and with rapper Tinchy Stryder on the same programme in May 2014, about copyright infringement and music piracy.[29] In March 2015, he appeared on The Big Questions, discussing topics relating to feminism and discrimination against men in the United Kingdom.[30]

Yiannopoulos is a supporter of Donald Trump, whom he refers to as “my daddy”. He’s compared to Ann Coulter and is referred to as the “face of a political movement,” but his real concern is “pop culture and free speech.” As he states: “I don’t care about politics, I only talk about politics because of Trump.”[16]

The Telegraph Tech Start-Up 100

Yiannopoulos organised a method of ranking the most promising technology start-ups in Europe, The Telegraph Tech Start-Up 100, in 2011. It operated through an events company called Wrong Agency, started by Yiannopoulos and David Rosenberg, a friend from Cambridge University. The company was dissolved shortly after the ceremony that awarded the top start-up.[4]Mike Butcher of TechCrunch said the main prize had been given to music streaming service Spotify, even though his casting vote had gone to the controversial payday loan company Wonga, because the Telegraph considered Wonga’s reputation objectionable.[31]

The Kernel

Together with university friends David Rosenberg and David Haywood Smith, journalist Stephen Pritchard and former Telegraph employee Adrian McShane, Yiannopoulos launched The Kernel in November 2011 to “fix European technology journalism”.[32]The Kernel was at that time owned by Sentinel Media.

In 2012, the online magazine became embroiled in a legal dispute with one of its contributors after he said it failed to pay money owed to him.[4]The Kernel closed in March 2013, with thousands of pounds owed to former contributor Jason Hesse when he won a summary judgement from an employment tribunal against parent company Sentinel Media. Margot Huysman, whom Yiannopoulos had appointed associate editor and was one of the people seeking payment, said that many working for the site had been “screwed over” personally and financially.[33] Yiannopoulos also threatened, via email, to release embarrassing details and photographs of a Kernel contributor who sought payment for their work for the site and he also accused the contributor of being behind the “majority of damage to The Kernel“. The unnamed contributor told the Guardian that the emails had been referred to the police.[34]

German venture capital vehicle BERLIN42 acquired The Kernels assets in early 2013. The website displayed plans for a relaunch in August 2013 with fresh investment and Yiannopoulos reinstated as editor-in-chief.[35]BERLIN42 founding partner Aydogan Ali Schosswald would join its newly formed publishing company, Kernel Media, as chief executive. Yiannopoulos personally paid six former contributors money that the defunct company was unable to pay.[35] Parent company Sentinel Media Ltd was eventually dissolved on 18 February 2014 after being struck off by Companies House.[36]

The Independent on Sunday reported that the relaunched publication, based between London and Berlin, would focus on “modern warfare, neuroscience, artificial intelligence, pornography and space travel” from August, but newsletter The Nutshell would not return.[37] In 2014, The Kernel was acquired by the parent company of The Daily Dot, Daily Dot Media. After the acquisition by Daily Dot Media, Yiannopoulos stepped down as editor-in-chief though he remained an adviser to the company.[38]

Gamergate

Yiannopoulos played a role in early news coverage of the Gamergate controversy, criticising what he saw as the politicisation of video game culture by “an army of sociopathic feminist programmers and campaigners, abetted by achingly politically correct American tech bloggers”.[39][40][41] In December 2014, he announced he was working on a book about Gamergate.[42]

As part of his coverage of Gamergate, he published correspondence from GameJournoPros, a private mailing list used by video game journalists to discuss industry related topics.[43][44] Yiannopoulos said that the list was evidence that journalists were colluding to offer negative coverage of Gamergate.[45] Kyle Orland, the creator of the list, responded to the leak on Ars Technica. Orland disputed the claim that the list suggested collusion among journalists, but said that he had written a message saying several things that he later regretted.[46] Carter Dotson of pocketgamer.biz said that the list was indicative of an echo chamber effect in the gaming press.[47]

During the controversy, Yiannopoulos said that he received a syringe filled with an unknown substance through the post,[48][49] as well as a dead animal.

In May 2015, a meetup in Washington D.C. for supporters of Gamergate arranged by Yiannopoulos and Christina Hoff Sommers was targeted by a bomb threat made over Twitter, according to the local police responding to information supplied by the FBI.[50] Similarly, three months later, an event with the Society of Professional Journalists in August 2015 was targeted by bomb threats, forcing the evacuation of an event with Yiannopoulos and Sommers.[51][52][53][54]

Breitbart Tech

In October 2015, the Breitbart News Network placed Yiannopoulos in charge of its new “Breitbart Tech” section. The site has six full-time staff, including an eSports specialist. On 10 February it was announced that Yiannopoulos resigned.[55][56]

Yiannopoulos Privilege Grant

In January 2016, Yiannopoulos co-founded the Yiannopoulos Privilege Grant with Margaret MacLennan.[57] The grant plans to disburse 50 grants of $2,500 to disadvantaged white men to assist them with their tertiary expenses, starting in the 2016–17 academic year. 100 grants of the same amount will be dispersed in the second year, and 200 in the third.[58] The Privilege Grant’s official website was temporarily taken down due to DDoS attacks.[59] As of August 2016, the grant scheme had not paid out any money or filed paperwork to become a charity in the United States.[60]

Margaret McLennan, formerly bursary manager of the grant, posted criticism of it on social media in August 2016, saying it was mismanaged and that she had stopped managing the grant the previous March because she hadn’t been paid and that the movement had ceased.[61][62] Yiannopoulos apologised for mismanaging the grant and admitted that he had missed a deadline for turning donations into bursaries. He denied speculation he had spent the money and blamed a busy schedule. He appointed a new fund administrator, and a pilot grant had been scheduled to begin the following spring, with full disbursement in the 2017/18 academic year.[61]

Twitter controversies and permanent ban

In December 2015, Twitter briefly suspended Yiannopoulos’ account after he changed his profile to describe himself as Buzzfeed‘s “social justice editor”.[63] His Twitter account’s blue “verification” checkmark was removed by the site the following month.[63] Twitter declined to give an explanation for the removal of verification, saying that they do not comment on individual cases.[64] Some news outlets speculated that Yiannopoulos had violated its speech and harassment codes, as with an instance where he told another user that they “deserved to be harassed”.[65][66] Others worried that Twitter was targeting conservatives.[67][68][69]

In March 2016, Yiannopoulos acquired accreditation for a White House press briefing for the first time.[70]

For his criticism of Islam after the 2016 Orlando nightclub shooting, a terrorist attack on a gay nightclub, his Twitter account was briefly suspended in June 2016. His account was later restored.[71]

In July 2016, Yiannopoulos panned the Ghostbusters reboot as “a movie to help lonely middle-aged women feel better about being left on the shelf”.[72] After the film’s release, Twitter trolls attacked African American actress Leslie Jones with racist slurs and bigoted commentary. Yiannopoulos wrote three public tweets about Jones, saying “Ghostbusters is doing so badly they’ve deployed [Leslie Jones] to play the victim on Twitter,” before describing her reply to him as “Barely literate” and then calling her a “black dude”.[73][74][75] Multiple media outlets have described Yiannopoulos’ tweets as encouraging the abuse directed at Jones.[76][77] Yiannopoulos was then permanently banned by Twitter.[78]

Yiannopoulos stated that he was banned because of his conservative beliefs.[79] In an interview with CNBC, he denounced the abusive tweets sent by others at Jones, and said he was not responsible for them.[80] After his suspension from Twitter, the hashtag “#FreeMilo” began trending on the site by those who opposed Twitter’s decision to ban him.[81] In an interview at the 2016 Republican National Convention, Yiannopoulos thanked Twitter for banning him because he believed it made him more famous.[82]

Controversy related to paedophilia comments

In February 2017, it was announced that Yiannopoulos would address the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). A conservative website, Reagan Battalion, then posted a video of clips of a YouTube interview.[83][84] In the interview in a January 2016 episode of the podcast Drunken Peasants,[85] Yiannopoulos stated that sexual relationships between 13-year-old boys and adults can be “consensual,” because some 13-year-olds are, in his view, sexually and emotionally mature enough to consent to sex with adults.[86][87] He used his own experience as an example, saying he was mature enough to be capable of giving consent at a young age.[83] He also stated that “paedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13 years old, who is sexually mature” but rather that “paedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty”.[86][87] He also stated in the video “I think the [age of consent] law is probably about right, that is probably roughly the right age … but there are certainly people who are capable of giving consent at a younger age, I certainly consider myself to be one of them.”[86]

Defending himself, Yiannopoulos described his comments as the “usual blend of British sarcasm, provocation and gallows humour” and denied endorsing child molestation. He also claimed the video has been edited to give a misleading impression.[88][89] Yiannopoulos stated that: “I will not apologize for dealing with my life experiences in the best way that I can, which is humour. No one can tell me or anyone else who has lived through sexual abuse how to deal with those emotions. But I am sorry to other abuse victims if my own personal way of dealing with what happened to me has hurt you.”[90]

Media personalities condemned these comments, and interpreted them as an endorsement of paedophilia;[91] CPAC withdrew Yiannopoulos’s invitation to speak at their annual event as he “condoned pedophilia” through his comments,[92] stating that his apology was inadequate.[89]

Editorials in conservative media, including National Review,[93]The Blaze,[94]Townhall,[95] and The American Conservative[96] have characterized his comments as supportive of paedophilia or pederasty. Commentators such as Matthew Rozsa of Salon.com and Margaret Hartmann of New York magazine wrote that in making this statement, Yiannopoulos is technically correct in distinguishing between paedophilia, hebephilia, and ephebophilia,[97][98]which are defined in the academic literature in line with the Tanner stages.[99][100] The authors also noted, however, that the term “paedophilia” is commonly used to denounce relationships of the sort allegedly promoted by Yiannopoulos,[97][98] and this imprecise usage of “paedophile” as interchangeable with “child molester” is also recognised in academic writings.[101]

In response to the controversy, Simon & Schustercancelled its plans to publish his autobiography in June 2017.[102] Media outlets reported on 20 February that Breitbart was considering terminating Yiannopoulos’ contract as a result of the controversy.[103][104][105] Yiannopoulos resigned from Breitbart on 21 February after half a dozen employees threatened to leave.[106][107]

Controversies

Personal sexuality

While Yiannopoulos is openly gay, he has stated that gay rights are detrimental to humanity, and that gay men should “get back in the closet”.[108] He has described being gay as “aberrant” and “a lifestyle choice guaranteed to bring [gay people] pain and unhappiness”.[109]

Some have accused Yiannopoulos of exaggerating his homosexuality for comic effect, with James Kirchick alleging that Yiannopoulos engages in a form of “gay blackface” which “combines the mincingcamp of Quentin Crisp with the reactionary politics of Jörg Haider and is the sort of thing that might have been mildly amusing on a pre-AIDS-era episode of Hollywood Squares.”[19] Kevin Williamson in the National Review argued that “Milo Yiannopoulos of Breitbart London has done more to put homosexual camp in the service of right-wing authoritarianism than any man has since the fellows at Hugo Boss sewed all those nifty SS uniforms.”[110]

Feminism

Yiannopoulos and feminist Julie Bindel were scheduled to participate in October 2015 in the University of Manchester Free Speech and Secular Society’s debate ′From liberation to censorship: does modern feminism have a problem with free speech?′. However, the Students’ Union banned first Bindel, then also Yiannopoulos.[111] The Union cited Bindel’s comments on transgender women and Yiannopoulos’ opinions on rape culture and stated that both breached the Union’s safe-space policy.[112][113]

Yiannopoulos was scheduled to talk at Bristol University the following month.[114] After protesters attempted to have him banned from the university, the event became a debate between Yiannopoulos and The Daily Telegraph blogger and feminist Rebecca Reid.[115]

Relationship with the alt-right

In a Breitbart article, he and a co-author described the alt-right movement as “dangerously bright”. Tablet noted that many of these intellectual backers write for publications Tablet describes as racist and antisemitic, like VDARE and American Renaissance.[19] The article was criticised by opponents of the right-wing for excusing the extremist elements of the alt-right, and also by neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer who claim that racism and antisemitism are pillars of the movement.[116][117] As Yiannopoulos has said:

“Trust me, alt-right hardliners don’t like me any more than they like the Republican establishment or Hillary: I’m a degenerate, race-mixing gay Jew, and they don’t let me forget it!”[9]

A Daily Beast article in September 2016 suggested that Yiannopoulos has received funding from virtual reality tycoon Palmer Luckey.[118]

Media coverage

Yiannopoulos was twice featured in Wired UK‘s yearly top 100 most influential people in Britain’s digital economy: at 84 in 2011[119] and at 98 in 2012.[22][120] In 2012, he was called the “pit bull of tech media” by Ben Dowell of The Observer.[121]

Yiannopoulos has appeared twice on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast.[122][123]

Charity work

Yiannopoulos hosted the Young Rewired State competition in 2010, an initiative to showcase the technological talents of 15–18-year-olds.[124] He organised The London Nude Tech Calendar, a calendar featuring members of the London technology scene to raise money for Take Heart India.[125]

Personal life

At the moment that Yiannopoulos says he “chose to be gay”, he wrote that he smuggled a “black drug dealer into my bedroom” at age 15, describing himself as a “coalburner” for doing so.[126] His father married a Jamaican, which Yiannopoulos claims is “where I get my coal burning from”.[16] Yiannopoulos has a long-term, black Muslim boyfriend, and claims to “like black guys for my love life, straight white males as employees, and girls as drinking buddies.”[16] As he joked to The New York Times, “I call myself a Trump-sexual. I have a very antiwhite bedroom policy, but Trump is kind of like the exception to that rule.”[127]

Before he was born his father wanted a divorce, but his mother was pregnant so his parents stayed together for six more years. Yiannopoulos has not seen his father in years.[16]

Dangerous Faggot Tour

In late 2015, Yiannopoulos began a campus speaking tour called “The Dangerous Faggot Tour”, encompassing universities in the United States and Great Britain. A number of his scheduled speeches in Great Britain were cancelled.[128] Although most of his American speeches were not cancelled, some were met with notable protest ranging from vocal disruptions to violent demonstrations. The journalist Audrey Goddard analysed his speech at the University of Pittsburgh, concluding that Yiannopoulos spends the “majority of the time voicing his opinions with little to no factual statements accompanying them”, which Goddard determined was ironic taking in account how Yiannopoulos repeatedly insisted “that he was just stating ‘facts'”.[129]

Rutgers University

On 9 February 2016, Yiannopoulos spoke at Rutgers University. At the start of his speech, female protesters suddenly stood up among the crowd and began smearing red paint on their faces before chanting “Black Lives Matter“. The mostly pro-Yiannopoulos crowd responded by chanting “Trump” over and over again until the protesters left, allowing Yiannopoulos to continue his speech.[130]

University of Minnesota

On 17 February 2016, a student-run conservative magazine at the University of Minnesota hosted Yiannopolous and Christina Hoff Sommers, and the event was also met by protesters. Roughly 40 protesters outside repeatedly chanted “Yiannopoulos, out of Minneapolis,” while about five protesters made it inside the event, shouting and sounding noisemakers, before being escorted out by security.[131] In response to these protests, members of the university faculty began pushing for more robust free speech protections at Minnesota.[132]

DePaul University

On 24 May 2016 Yiannopoulos’s speech at DePaul University was interrupted after about 15 minutes by two protesters who rushed the stage: DePaul alumnus and pastor Edward Ward, and student Kayla Johnson.[133][134] The crowd overwhelmingly began booing the protesters, at one point chanting “Get a job.” The campus security team that university administrators required the College Republicans to hire the day before (at an extra cost of $1,000, part of which was paid by Yiannopoulos himself), did not make an effort to remove the protesters.[135][136] This was in addition to further protests outside the event venue both before and after the event, which featured students reacting violently to Yiannopoulos’s supporters.[137]

In the aftermath of the incident, university president Dennis H. Holtschneider issued a statement reaffirming the value of free speech and apologising for the harm caused by Yiannopolous’s appearance on the campus. Attendees of the talk, organised by DePaul’s College Republican’s Chapter, criticised university police and event security for not removing the protesters.[138][139] Yiannopoulos later stated that he and the College Republicans wanted a refund of the money that was paid to the security team that ultimately did nothing.[140][141][142] The university later agreed to reimburse the College Republicans for the costs of event security.[143] Within three days, the university’s ratings on Facebook became overwhelmingly dominated by 1-star reviews. This ultimately accumulated over 16,000 1-star reviews that brought the university’s average to 1.1, before the page’s rating system was closed indefinitely.[144]

Opposed by Young Americans for Liberty

In May 2016 Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) staffer told YAL chapter leaders that Yiannopoulos’ endorsement of Republican presidential candidate at YAL events was creating “confusion” over the non-profit’s message. The memo was widely interpreted by chapters as an official ban of Milo at YAL events, though YAL quickly disavowed the staffer’s comment and promised to “not ban any speaker.”[145]

UCLA

Yiannopoulos spoke at the University of California, Los Angeles on 31 May 2016 where the event featured an interview-style presentation alongside Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report. Prior to the start of the event, protesters formed human chains to block the front door to the theatre where the event was scheduled to take place. In response, those who wanted to attend the event were forced to sneak in through the back door, although the protesters also found out about that entrance and attempted to block it as well, subsequently leading to several attendees shoving their way through the crowd to get in. The Los Angeles Police Department officers on duty then had to prevent protesters from entering while letting attendees pass through, thus delaying the event for about an hour until the room could fill to capacity. Twice during the speech, Yiannopoulos was interrupted by a female protester who shouted “You’re spreading hate,” and was subsequently booed by the audience; despite seeming to leave after the first outburst, she returned to heckle him again before finally being escorted out of the venue.[146]The next day, it was revealed that the LAPD had come in as the event was ending and told all those still in the theatre that they had to be evacuated due to a bomb threat.

Michigan State University

On 7 December 2016 at Michigan State University, Yiannopoulos and his crew posed as protesters dressed in black with ski masks or scarfs covering their faces and carrying signs prior to his “Reclaiming Constantinople” show. While carrying a sign “MILO SUCKS”, he unveiled to “cheers and jeers” and left the protest under police protection unharmed. Seven protesters were arrested prior to the event and the meeting occurred as planned.[147][148]

University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

Yiannopoulos spoke at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee on 13 December 2016, hosted by Turning Point USA. President-elect Donald Trump appeared nearby the same day; Yiannopoulos is a Trump supporter. In his talk, Yiannopoulos mocked a transgender student who had protested a UWM locker room policy.[149][150] More than 300 students and faculty had signed a letter of protest delivered to Mark Mone’s office the week before the event. In response, Mone’s office issued a statement noting that “UWM does not endorse Yiannopoulos’ views” and “no tuition or segregated fee funds are being used to support the event.”[151]

UC Davis

On 13 January 2017, Yiannopoulos’ event (which was also going to feature entrepreneur Martin Shkreli) at the University of California, Davis was cancelled after protests.[152] Yiannopoulos said that the event was cancelled due to violence, but this was disputed by the police, who said that there was no evidence of violence or property destruction.[153] One person was arrested for resisting arrest.[154]

University of Washington

On 20 January 2017, Yiannopoulos spoke at the University of Washington. The event sparked large protests outside the event, adding to the violent protests at which brick and fireworks were thrown by demonstrators protesting the inauguration of Donald Trump.[155] A 34-year-old man was shot while protesting the event, and was put into intensive care at a hospital in Seattle, having suffered from life-threatening injuries.[156] The man has since been declared to be in a stable condition. The as-of-yet unnamed shooter – a 29 year old and a former student of the University of Washington – was attending the event in support of Yiannopoulos and President Donald Trump. He eventually turned himself in to the University of Washington Police, and he was later questioned and released without being charged with a crime. A witness recalled seeing someone release pepper spray in the crowd, which triggered the shooting confrontation. Through his lawyer, the shooting victim announced he plans to make a public statement at a later date.[157][156][158]

UC Berkeley

On 1 February 2017, Yiannopoulos was scheduled to make a speech at UC Berkeley at 8:00 pm. Over 1,500 people gathered to protest the event on the steps of Sproul Hall, with some violence occurring.[159] Prior to the event, more than 100 UC Berkeley faculty had signed a petition urging the university to cancel the event.[160] According to the university, around 150 masked agitators came onto campus and interrupted the protest, setting fires, damaging property, throwing fireworks, attacking members of the crowd, and throwing rocks at the police.[161] These violent protestors included members of BAMN, who threw rocks at police, shattered windows, threw Molotov cocktails, and later continued to vandalise downtown Berkeley.[162] Among those assaulted were a Syrian Muslim in a suit who was pepper sprayed and hit with a rod by a protester dressed all in black who said “You look like a Nazi”,[163] and a white woman who was pepper sprayed while being interviewed by a TV reporter.[164] Citing security concerns, the UC Police Department decided to cancel the event.[159][165] One person was arrested for failure to disperse, and there was about $100,000 in damage.[166] The police were criticised for their “hands off” policy whereby they did not arrest any of the protesters who committed assault, vandalism, or arson.[167][168] President Donald Trump criticised the university on Twitter for failing to allow freedom of speech, and threatened to defund UC Berkeley.[169][170] After the incident, Yiannopoulos’ upcoming book, Dangerous, returned to number one for a few days on Amazon‘s “Best Sellers” list.[171][172] According to Yiannopoulos’ Facebook post, he plans to return to Berkeley, “[h]opefully within the next few months.”[173]

Books

Yiannopoulos published two poetry books under the name Milo Andreas Wagner. His 2007 release Eskimo Papoose was later scrutinised for re-using lines from pop music and television without attribution, to which he replied that it was done deliberately and the work was satirical.[3]

Dangerous

An autobiography titled Dangerous was announced in December 2016. Yiannopoulos has reportedly received a $250,000 advance payment from the book’s publisher, Simon & Schuster. It was intended to be published under their Threshold Editions imprint and to be issued on 14 March 2017, but Yiannopoulos pushed back the schedule to June so he could write about the demonstrations during his campus tour.[174] A day after its announcement, pre-sales for the book elevated it to first place on Amazon.com‘s list of best-sellers.[175]

The book announcement attracted controversy, including a statement on Twitter by The Chicago Review of Books that they would not review any Simon & Schuster book because of the book deal.[176][177] It also drew support from a number of anti-censorship groups, including English PEN.[178]

Simon & Schuster dropped publication of Dangerous on 20 February 2017. The publisher’s cancellation occurred in the wake of the video and sexual-consent comments controversy that also lead to CPAC withdrawing its speaking invitation and Yiannopoulos to resign from Brietbart.[90][179][90]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milo_Yiannopoulos

Millennials

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“Generation Y” redirects here. For other uses, see Generation Y (disambiguation) and Millennials (disambiguation).

Millennials (also known as Generation Y) are the demographic cohort following Generation X. There are no precise dates for when this cohort starts or ends; demographers and researchers typically use the early 1980s as starting birth years and the mid-1990s to early 2000s as ending birth years. Millennials, who are generally the children of baby boomers and older Gen Xers, are sometimes referred to as “Echo Boomers” due to a major surge in birth rates in the 1980s and 1990s. The 20th-century trend toward smaller families in developed countries continued, however, so the relative impact of the “baby boom echo” was generally less pronounced than the original post–World War II boom.

Millennial characteristics vary by region, depending on social and economic conditions. However, the generation is generally marked by an increased use and familiarity with communications, media, and digital technologies. In most parts of the world, their upbringing was marked by an increase in a liberal approach to politics and economics; the effects of this environment are disputed. The Great Recession has had a major impact on this generation because it has caused historically high levels of unemployment among young people, and has led to speculation about possible long-term economic and social damage to this generation.

Contents

 [show] 

Terminology

Authors William Strauss and Neil Howe are widely credited with naming the Millennials.[1] They coined the term in 1987, around the time children born in 1982 were entering preschool, and the media were first identifying their prospective link to the new millennium as the high school graduating class of 2000.[2] They wrote about the cohort in their books Generations: The History of America’s Future, 1584 to 2069 (1991)[3] and Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation (2000).[2]

In August 1993, an Ad Age editorial coined the phrase Generation Y to describe those who were aged 11 or younger as well as the teenagers of the upcoming ten years who were defined as different from Generation X.[4][5]According to Horovitz, in 2012, Ad Age “threw in the towel by conceding that Millennials is a better name than Gen Y”,[1] and by 2014, a past director of data strategy at Ad Age said to NPR “the Generation Y label was a placeholder until we found out more about them”.[6] Millennials are sometimes called Echo Boomers,[7] due to them being the offspring of the baby boomers and due to the significant increase in birth rates from the early 1980s to mid 1990s, mirroring that of their parents. In the United States, birth rates peaked in August 1990[8][9] and a 20th-century trend toward smaller families in developed countries continued.[10][11] In his book The Lucky Few: Between the Greatest Generation and the Baby Boom, author Elwood Carlson called this cohort the “New Boomers”.[12]

Psychologist Jean Twenge described Millennials as “Generation Me” in her 2006 book Generation Me: Why Today’s Young Americans Are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled—and More Miserable Than Ever Before, which was updated in 2014.[13][14] In 2013, Time magazine ran a cover story titled Millennials: The Me Me Me Generation.[15] Newsweek used the term Generation 9/11 to refer to young people who were between the ages of 10 and 20 years during the terrorist acts of 11 September 2001. The first reference to “Generation 9/11” was made in the cover story of the 12 November 2001 issue of Newsweek.[16] Alternative names for this group proposed include Generation We,[17] Global Generation, Generation Next[18] and the Net Generation.[19]

Chinese Millennials are commonly called the 1980s and 1990s generations. At a 2015 conference in Shanghai organized by University of Southern California‘s US-China Institute, Millennials in China were examined and contrasted with American Millennials[20] Findings included Millennials’ marriage, childbearing, and child raising preferences, life and career ambitions, and attitudes towards volunteerism and activism.[21]

Date and age range defining

A minority of demographers and researchers start the generation in the mid-to-late 1970s, such as Synchrony Financial which describes Millennials as starting as early as 1976,[22][23] Mobilize.org which uses 1976–1996,[24]MetLife which uses birth dates ranging from 1977–1994,[25] and Nielsen Media Research which uses 1977–1995.[26][27]

The majority of researchers and demographers start the generation in the early 1980s. Many end the generation in the mid-1990s. Australia‘s McCrindle Research[28] uses 1980–1994. A 2013 PricewaterhouseCoopers[29] report and Edelman Berland[30] use 1980–1995. Gallup Inc.,[31][32][33] Eventbrite[34][35] and Dale Carnegie Training and MSW Research[36] all use 1980–1996. Ernst and Young uses 1981–1996.[37] Manpower Group uses 1982–1996.[38]

Others end the generation in the late 1990s or early 2000s. Goldman Sachs,[39] Resolution Foundation,[40][41] and a 2013 Time magazine cover story[42] all use 1980–2000. SYZYGY, a digital service agency partially owned by WPP uses 1981–1998,[43][44] and the United States Census Bureau uses 1982–2000.[45] Pew Research Center defines Millennials as being born from 1981 onwards, with no chronological end point set yet.[46][47]

Demographers William Straus and Neil Howe define Millennials as born between 1982–2004.[1] However, Howe described the dividing line between Millennials and the following Generation Z as “tentative” saying, “you can’t be sure where history will someday draw a cohort dividing line until a generation fully comes of age.” He noted that the Millennials’ range beginning in 1982 would point to the next generation’s window starting between 2000 and 2006.[48]

In his 2008 book The Lucky Few: Between the Greatest Generation and the Baby Boom, author Elwood Carlson defined this cohort as born between 1983–2001 based on the upswing in births after 1983 and finishing with the “political and social challenges” that occurred after the September 11 terrorist acts.[12] In 2016, U.S Pirg described Millennials as those born between 1983 and 2000.[49][50][51] On the American television program Survivor, for their 33rd season, subtitled Millennials vs. Gen X, the “Millennial tribe” consisted of individuals born between 1984 and 1997.[52]

Due to birth-year overlap between definitions of Generation X and Millennials, some individuals born in the late 1970s and early 1980s see themselves as being “between” the two generations.[53][54][55][56] Names given to those born in the Generation X and Millennial cusp years include Xennials, The Lucky Ones, Generation Catalano, and the Oregon Trail Generation.[56][57][58][59][60]

Traits

Authors William Strauss and Neil Howe believe that each generation has common characteristics that give it a specific character with four basic generational archetypes, repeating in a cycle. According to their hypothesis, they predicted Millennials will become more like the “civic-minded” G.I. Generation with a strong sense of community both local and global.[2] Strauss and Howe ascribe seven basic traits to the Millennial cohort: special, sheltered, confident, team-oriented, conventional, pressured, and achieving. Arthur E. Levine, author of When Hope and Fear Collide: A Portrait of Today’s College Student describes these generational images as “stereotypes”.[61]

Strauss and Howe’s research has been influential, but it also has critics.[61] Psychologist Jean Twenge says Strauss & Howe’s assertions are overly-deterministic, non-falsifiable, and unsupported by rigorous evidence. Twenge, the author of the 2006 book Generation Me, considers Millennials, along with younger members of Generation X, to be part of what she calls “Generation Me”.[62] Twenge attributes Millennials with the traits of confidence and tolerance, but also describes a sense of entitlement and narcissism, based on personality surveys showing increased narcissism among Millennials compared to preceding generations when they were teens and in their twenties. She questions the predictions of Strauss and Howe that this generation will turn out civic-minded.[63][64] A 2016 study by SYZYGY a digital service agency, found Millennials in the U.S. continue to exhibit elevated scores on the Narcissistic Personality Inventory as they age, finding millennials exhibited 16% more narcissism than older adults, with males scoring higher on average than females. The study examined two types of narcissism: grandiose narcissism, described as “the narcissism of extraverts, characterized by attention-seeking behavior, power and dominance”, and vulnerable narcissism, described as “the narcissism of introverts, characterized by an acute sense of self-entitlement and defensiveness.”[43][44][65]

The University of Michigan‘s “Monitoring the Future” study of high school seniors (conducted continually since 1975) and the American Freshman survey, conducted by UCLA’s Higher Education Research Institute of new college students since 1966, showed an increase in the proportion of students who consider wealth a very important attribute, from 45% for Baby Boomers (surveyed between 1967 and 1985) to 70% for Gen Xers, and 75% for Millennials. The percentage who said it was important to keep abreast of political affairs fell, from 50% for Baby Boomers to 39% for Gen Xers, and 35% for Millennials. The notion of “developing a meaningful philosophy of life” decreased the most across generations, from 73% for Boomers to 45% for Millennials. The willingness to be involved in an environmental cleanup program dropped from 33% for Baby Boomers to 21% for Millennials.[66]

A 2013 Pew Research Poll found that 84% of Millennials, born since 1980, who were at that time between the ages of 18 and 32, favored legalizing the use of marijuana.[67] In 2015, the Pew Research Center also conducted research regarding generational identity that said a majority did not like the “Millenial” label.[68]

In March 2014, the Pew Research Center issued a report about how “Millennials in adulthood” are “detached from institutions and networked with friends.”[69][70] The report said Millennials are somewhat more upbeat than older adults about America’s future, with 49% of Millennials saying the country’s best years are ahead though they’re the first in the modern era to have higher levels of student loan debt and unemployment.

Fred Bonner, a Samuel DeWitt Proctor Chair in Education at Rutgers University and author of Diverse Millennial Students in College: Implications for Faculty and Student Affairs, believes that much of the commentary on the Millennial Generation may be partially accurate, but overly general and that many of the traits they describe apply primarily to “white, affluent teenagers who accomplish great things as they grow up in the suburbs, who confront anxiety when applying to super-selective colleges, and who multitask with ease as their helicopter parents hover reassuringly above them.” During class discussions, Bonner listened to black and Hispanic students describe how some or all of the so-called core traits did not apply to them. They often said that the “special” trait, in particular, is unrecognizable. Other socio-economic groups often do not display the same attributes commonly attributed to Millennials. “It’s not that many diverse parents don’t want to treat their kids as special,” he says, “but they often don’t have the social and cultural capital, the time and resources, to do that.”[61]

In his book, Fast Future, author David Burstein describes Millennials’ approach to social change as “pragmatic idealism” with a deep desire to make the world a better place, combined with an understanding that doing so requires building new institutions while working inside and outside existing institutions.[71]

Workplace attitudes

There are vast, and conflicting, amounts of literature and empirical studies discussing the existence of generational differences as it pertains to the workplace. The majority of research concludes Millennials differ from both their generational cohort predecessors, and can be characterized by a preference for a flat corporate culture, an emphasis on work-life balance and social consciousness.

According to authors from Florida International University, original research performed by Howe and Strauss as well as Yu & Miller suggest Baby Boomers resonate primarily with loyalty, work ethic, steady career path, and compensation when it comes to their professional lives.[72] Generation X on the other hand, started shifting preferences towards an improved work-life balance with a heightened focus on individualistic advancement, stability, and job satisfaction.[72] Meanwhile, Millennials place an emphasis on producing meaningful work, finding a creative outlet, and have a preference for immediate feedback.[72] Findings also suggest the introduction of social media has augmented collaborative skills and created a preference for a team-oriented environment.[72]

In the 2010 the Journal of Business and Psychology, contributors Myers and Sadaghiani find Millennials “expect close relationships and frequent feedback from supervisors” to be a main point of differentiation.[73] Multiple studies observe Millennials’ associating job satisfaction with free flow of information, strong connectivity to supervisors, and more immediate feedback.[73] Hershatter and Epstein, researches from Emory University, argue a lot of these traits can be linked to Millennials entering the educational system on the cusp of academic reform, which created a much more structured educational system.[74] Some argue in the wake of these reforms, such as the No Child Left Behind Act, Millennials have increasingly sought the aid of mentors and advisers, leading to 66% of Millennials seeking a flat work environment.[74]

Hershatter and Epstein also stress a growing importance on work-life balance. Studies show nearly one-third of students top priority is to “balance personal and professional life”.[74] The Brain Drain Study shows nearly 9 out of 10 Millennials place an importance on work-life balance, with additional surveys demonstrating the generation to favor familial over corporate values.[74] Studies also show a preference for work-life balance, which contrast to the Baby Boomers’ work-centric attitude.[73]

Data also suggests Millennials are driving a shift towards the public service sector. In 2010, Myers and Sadaghiani published research in the Journal of Business and Psychology stating heightened participation in the Peace Corps and MeriCorps as a result of Millennials, with volunteering being at all-time highs.[73] Volunteer activity between 2007 and 2008 show the Millennial age group experienced almost three-times the increase of the overall population, which is consistent with a survey of 130 college upperclassmen depicting an emphasis on altruism in their upbringing.[73] This has led, according to a Harvard University Institute of Politics, six out of ten Millennials to consider a career in public service.[73]

The 2014 Brookings publication shows a generational adherence to corporate social responsibility, with the National Society of High School Scholars (NSHSS) 2013 survey and Universum’s 2011 survey, depicting a preference to work for companies engaged in the betterment of society.[75] Millennials shift in attitudes has led to data depicting 64% of Millennials would take a 60% pay cut to pursue a career path aligned with their passions, and financial institutions have fallen out of favor with banks comprising 40% of the generation’s least like brands.[75]

In 2008, author Ron Alsop called the Millennials “Trophy Kids,”[76] a term that reflects a trend in competitive sports, as well as many other aspects of life, where mere participation is frequently enough for a reward. It has been reported that this is an issue in corporate environments.[76] Some employers are concerned that Millennials have too great expectations from the workplace.[77] Some studies predict they will switch jobs frequently, holding many more jobs than Gen Xers due to their great expectations.[78]

There is also a contention that the major differences are found solely between Millennials and Generation X. Researchers from the University of Missouri and The University of Tennessee conducted a study based on measurement equivalence to determine if such a difference does in fact exist .[79] The study looked at 1,860 participants whom had completed the Multidimensional Work Ethic Profile (MWEP), a survey aimed at measuring identification with work-ethic characteristics, across a 12-year period spanning from 1996 to 2008.[79] The results of the findings suggest the main difference in work ethic sentiments arose between the two most recent generational cohorts, Generation X and Millennials, with relatively small variances between the two generations and their predecessor, the Baby Boomers.[79]

That said, some research fail to find convincing differences. A meta study conducted by researchers from The George Washington University and The U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences questions the validity of workplace differences across any generational cohort. According to the researches, disagreement in which events to include when assigning generational cohorts, as well as varied opinions on which age ranges to include in each generational category is the main driver behind their skepticism.[80] The analysis of 20 research reports focusing on the three work related factors of job satisfaction, organizational commitment and intent to turnover proved any variation was too small to discount the impact of employee tenure and aging of individuals.[80] Newer research shows that Millennials change jobs for the same reasons as other generations—namely, more money and a more innovative work environment. They look for versatility and flexibility in the workplace, and strive for a strong work–life balance in their jobs[81] and have similar career aspirations to other generations, valuing financial security and a diverse workplace just as much as their older colleagues.[82]

Political views

Surveys of political attitudes among Millennials in the United Kingdom have suggested increasingly social liberal views, as well as higher overall support for classical liberal economic policies than preceding generations. They are more likely to support same-sex marriage and the legalization of drugs.[83] The Economist parallels this with Millennials in the United States, whose attitudes are more supportive of social liberal policies and same-sex marriage relative to other demographics.[83] They are also more likely to oppose animal testing for medical purposes than older generations.[84] Bernie Sanders, a self-proclaimed democratic socialist and democratic candidate in the 2016 United States presidential election, was the most popular candidate among Millennial voters in the primary phase, having garnered more votes from people under 30 in 21 states than the major parties’ candidates, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, did combined.[85] In April 2016, The Washington Post viewed him as changing the way Millennials viewed politics, saying, “He’s not moving a party to the left. He’s moving a generation to the left.”[86][87] Bernie Sanders referred to Millennials as “the least prejudiced generation in the history of the United States“.[88]

In the United Kingdom, the majority of Millennials opposed the British withdrawal from the European Union. Blaming Baby boomers, who largely supported the referendum, one commenter said: “The younger generation has lost the right to live and work in 27 other countries. We will never know the full extent of the lost opportunities, friendships, marriages and experiences we will be denied.”[89][90][91][92] The Washington Post phrased this as “we let you steal our future”, reporting high voter turnout among those over 55 years of age and low voter turnout among those under 34 years of age.[93][94][95][96][97] A 2014 poll for the libertarian Reason magazine suggested that American Millennials were social liberals and fiscal centrists, more often than their global peers. The magazine predicted that Millennials would become more conservative on fiscal issues once they started paying taxes.[98]

Political correctness

Millennials have brought a resurgence of political correctness.[99] In 2015, a Pew Research study found 40% of Millennials in the United States supported government restriction of public speech offensive to minority groups. Support for restricting offensive speech was significantly lower among older generations: with 27% of Gen Xers, 24% of Baby Boomers, and only 12% of the Silent Generation supporting such restrictions. Pew Research noted similar age related trends in the United Kingdom, but not in Germany and Spain, where Millennials were less supportive of restricting offensive speech than older groups.[100] Millennials have brought changes to higher education in the US and the UK via drawing attention to microaggressions and lobbying for implementation of safe spaces and trigger warnings in the university setting. Critics of such changes have raised concerns regarding their impact on free speech, asserting these changes can promote censorship, while proponents have described these changes as promoting inclusiveness.[99][101][102]

Demographics in the United States

William Strauss and Neil Howe projected in their 1991 book Generations that the U.S. Millennial population would be 76 million.[103] Later[when?] Neil Howe revised the number to over 95 million people (in the U.S.).[citation needed] As of 2012, it was estimated that there were approximately 80 million U.S. Millennials.[104] The estimated number of U.S. Millennials in 2015 is 83.1 million people.[105] In 2016, the Pew Research Center found that Millennials surpassed Baby Boomers to become the largest living generation in the United States. By analyzing 2015 U.S Census data they found there were 75.4 million Millennials compared to 74.9 million Baby Boomers.[106][107]

Economic prospects

Economic prospects for some Millennials have declined largely due to the Great Recession in the late 2000s.[108][109][110] Several governments have instituted major youth employment schemes out of fear of social unrest due to the dramatically increased rates of youth unemployment.[111] In Europe, youth unemployment levels were very high (56% in Spain,[112] 44% in Italy,[113] 35% in the Baltic states, 19.1% in Britain[114] and more than 20% in many more countries). In 2009, leading commentators began to worry about the long-term social and economic effects of the unemployment.[115] Unemployment levels in other areas of the world were also high, with the youth unemployment rate in the U.S. reaching a record 19.1% in July 2010 since the statistic started being gathered in 1948.[116] In Canada, unemployment among youths in July 2009 was 15.9%, the highest it had been in 11 years.[117] Underemployment is also a major factor. In the U.S. the economic difficulties have led to dramatic increases in youth poverty, unemployment, and the numbers of young people living with their parents.[118] In April 2012, it was reported that half of all new college graduates in the US were still either unemployed or underemployed.[119] It has been argued that this unemployment rate and poor economic situation has given Millennials a rallying call with the 2011 Occupy Wall Street movement.[120] However, according to Christine Kelly, Occupy is not a youth movement and has participants that vary from the very young to very old.[121]

A variety of names have emerged in various European countries hard hit following the financial crisis of 2007–2008 to designate young people with limited employment and career prospects.[122] These groups can be considered to be more or less synonymous with Millennials, or at least major sub-groups in those countries. The Generation of €700 is a term popularized by the Greek mass media and refers to educated Greek twixters of urban centers who generally fail to establish a career. In Greece, young adults are being “excluded from the labor market” and some “leave their country of origin to look for better options”. They’re being “marginalized and face uncertain working conditions” in jobs that are unrelated to their educational background, and receive the minimum allowable base salary of €700 per month. This generation evolved in circumstances leading to the Greek debt crisis and some participated in the 2010–2011 Greek protests.[123] In Spain, they’re referred to as the mileurista (for €1,000 per month),[124] in France “The Precarious Generation,[125]” and as in Spain, Italy also has the “milleurista”; generation of 1,000 euros (per month).[122]

In 2015, Millennials in New York City were reported as earning 20% less than the generation before them, as a result of entering the workforce during the great recession. Despite higher college attendance rates than Generation X, many were stuck in low-paid jobs, with the percentage of degree-educated young adults working in low-wage industries rising from 23% to 33% between 2000 and 2014.[126] In 2016, research from the Resolution Foundation found Millennials in the UK earned £8,000 less in their 20s than Generation X, describing Millennials as “on course to become the first generation to earn less than the one before”.[127][128]

Generation Flux is a neologism and psychographic (not demographic) designation coined by Fast Company for American employees who need to make several changes in career throughout their working lives due to the chaotic nature of the job market following the Great Recession. Societal change has been accelerated by the use of social media, smartphones, mobile computing, and other new technologies.[129] Those in “Generation Flux” have birth-years in the ranges of both Generation X and Millennials. “Generation Sell” was used by author William Deresiewicz to describe Millennials’ interest in small businesses.[130]

Millennials are expected to make up approximately half of the U.S. workforce by 2020. Millennials are the most highly educated and culturally diverse group of all generations, and have been regarded as hard to please when it comes to employers.[131] To address these new challenges, many large firms are currently studying the social and behavioral patterns of Millennials and are trying to devise programs that decrease intergenerational estrangement, and increase relationships of reciprocal understanding between older employees and Millennials. The UK’s Institute of Leadership & Management researched the gap in understanding between Millennial recruits and their managers in collaboration with Ashridge Business School.[132] The findings included high expectations for advancement, salary and for a coaching relationship with their manager, and suggested that organizations will need to adapt to accommodate and make the best use of Millennials. In an example of a company trying to do just this, Goldman Sachs conducted training programs that used actors to portray Millennials who assertively sought more feedback, responsibility, and involvement in decision making. After the performance, employees discussed and debated the generational differences they saw played out.[76]

Millennials have benefited the least from the economic recovery following the Great Recession, as average incomes for this generation have fallen at twice the general adult population’s total drop and are likely to be on a path toward lower incomes for at least another decade. A Bloomberg L.P. article wrote that “Three and a half years after the worst recession since the Great Depression, the earnings and employment gap between those in the under-35 population and their parents and grandparents threatens to unravel the American dream of each generation doing better than the last. The nation’s younger workers have benefited least from an economic recovery that has been the most uneven in recent history.”[133]

In 2014, Millennials were entering an increasingly multi-generational workplace.[134] Even though research has shown that Millennials are joining the workforce during a tough economic time they still have remained optimistic, as shown when about nine out of ten Millennials surveyed by the Pew Research Center said that they currently have enough money or that they will eventually reach their long-term financial goals.[135]

Peter Pan generation

American sociologist Kathleen Shaputis labeled Millennials as the Boomerang Generation or Peter Pan generation, because of the members’ perceived tendency for delaying some rites of passage into adulthood for longer periods than most generations before them. These labels were also a reference to a trend toward members living with their parents for longer periods than previous generations.[136] Kimberly Palmer regards the high cost of housing and higher education, and the relative affluence of older generations, as among the factors driving the trend.[137] Questions regarding a clear definition of what it means to be an adult also impacts a debate about delayed transitions into adulthood and the emergence of a new life stage, Emerging Adulthood. A 2012 study by professors at Brigham Young University found that college students were more likely to define “adult” based on certain personal abilities and characteristics rather than more traditional “rite of passage” events.[138] Larry Nelson noted that “In prior generations, you get married and you start a career and you do that immediately. What young people today are seeing is that approach has led to divorces, to people unhappy with their careers … The majority want to get married […] they just want to do it right the first time, the same thing with their careers.”[138]

Their expectations have had a dampening effect on Millennials’ rate of marriage. In 2012, the average American couple spent an average of over $27,000 on their wedding.[139] A 2013 joint study by sociologists at the University of Virginia and Harvard University found that the decline and disappearance of stable full-time jobs with health insurance and pensions for people who lack a college degree has had profound effects on working-class Americans, who now are less likely to marry and have children within marriage than those with college degrees.[140] Data from a 2014 study of US Millennials revealed over 56% of this cohort considers themselves as part of the working class, with only approximately 35% considering themselves as part of the middle class; this class identity is the lowest polling of any generation.[141]

Research by the Urban Institute conducted in 2014, projected that if current trends continue, Millennials will have a lower marriage rate compared to previous generations, predicting that by age 40, 30.7% of millennial women will remain single, approximately twice the share of their single Gen X counterparts. The data showed similar trends for males.[142][143] A 2016 study from Pew Research showed Millennials delay some activities considered rites of passage of adulthood with data showing young adults aged 18–34 were more likely to live with parents than with a relationship partner, an unprecedented occurrence since data collection began in 1880. Data also showed a significant increase in the percentage of young adults living with parents compared to the previous demographic cohort, Generation X, with 23% of young adults aged 18–34 living with parents in 2000, rising to 32% in 2014. Additionally, in 2000, 43% of those aged 18–34 were married or living with a partner, with this figure dropping to 31.6% in 2014. High student debt is described as one reason for continuing to live with parents, but may not be the dominant factor for this shift as the data shows the trend is stronger for those without a college education. Richard Fry, a senior economist for Pew Research said of Millennials, “they’re the group much more likely to live with their parents.” furthering “they’re concentrating more on school, careers and work and less focused on forming new families, spouses or partners and children”.[144][145]

According to a cross-generational study comparing Millennials to Generation X conducted at Wharton School of Business, more than half of Millennial undergraduates surveyed do not plan to have children. The researchers compared surveys of the Wharton graduating class of 1992 and 2012. In 1992, 78% of women planned to eventually have children dropping to 42% in 2012. The results were similar for male students. The research revealed among both genders the proportion of undergraduates who reported they eventually planned to have children had dropped in half over the course of a generation.[146][147][148]

Religion

In the U.S., Millennials are the least likely to be religious.[149] There is a trend towards irreligion that has been increasing since the 1940s.[150] 29 percent of Americans born between 1983 and 1994 are irreligious, as opposed to 21 percent born between 1963 and 1981, 15 percent born between 1948 and 1962 and only 7 percent born before 1948.[151] A 2005 study looked at 1,385 people aged 18 to 25 and found that more than half of those in the study said that they pray regularly before a meal. One-third said that they discussed religion with friends, attended religious services, and read religious material weekly. Twenty-three percent of those studied did not identify themselves as religious practitioners.[152] A Pew Research Center study on Millennials shows that of those between 18–29 years old, only 3% of these emerging adults self-identified as “atheists” and only 4% self-identified as “agnostics“. Overall, 25% of Millennials are “Nones” and 75% are religiously affiliated.[153]

Over half of Millennials polled in the United Kingdom in 2013 said they had “no religion nor attended a place of worship”, other than for a wedding or a funeral. 25% said they “believe in a God“, while 19% believed in a “spiritual greater power” and 38% said they did not believe in God nor any other “greater spiritual power”. The poll also found 41% thought religion was “the cause of evil” in the world more often than good.[154]

Digital technology

Three people that appear to be Millennials using smartphones.

In their 2007 book, authors Junco and Mastrodicasa expanded on the work of William Strauss and Neil Howe to include research-based information about the personality profiles of Millennials, especially as it relates to higher education. They conducted a large-sample (7,705) research study of college students. They found that Next Generation college students, born between 1983–1992, were frequently in touch with their parents and they used technology at higher rates than people from other generations. In their survey, they found that 97% of these students owned a computer, 94% owned a mobile phone, and 56% owned an MP3 player. They also found that students spoke with their parents an average of 1.5 times a day about a wide range of topics. Other findings in the Junco and Mastrodicasa survey revealed 76% of students used instant messaging, 92% of those reported multitasking while instant messaging, 40% of them used television to get most of their news, and 34% of students surveyed used the Internet as their primary news source.[155][156]

Gen Xers and Millennials were the first to grow up with computers in their homes. In a 1999 speech at the New York Institute of Technology, Microsoft Chairman and CEO Bill Gates encouraged America’s teachers to use technology to serve the needs of the first generation of kids to grow up with the Internet.[157] Many Millennials enjoy a 250+-channel home cable TV universe. But many other millenials don’t even have a TV-set, and instead prefer streaming over the Internet.[158] One of the more popular forms of media use by Millienials is social networking. In 2010, research was published in the Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research which claimed that students who used social media and decided to quit showed the same withdrawal symptoms of a drug addict who quit their stimulant.[159] Marc Prensky coined the term “digital native” to describe “K through college” students in 2001, explaining they “represent the first generations to grow up with this new technology.”[160] Millennials are identified as “digital natives” by the Pew Research Center which conducted a survey titled Millennials in Adulthood.[70]

Millennials use social networking sites, such as Facebook, to create a different sense of belonging, make acquaintances, and to remain connected with friends.[161] In the Frontline episode “Generation Like” there is discussion about Millennials, their dependence on technology, and the ways the social media sphere is commoditized.[162]

Cultural identity

Strauss & Howe‘s book titled Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation describes the Millennial generation as “civic-minded”, rejecting the attitudes of the Baby Boomers and Generation X.[163] Since the 2000 U.S. Census, which allowed people to select more than one racial group, Millennials in abundance have asserted the ideal that all their heritages should be respected, counted, and acknowledged.[164][165] Millennials are the children of Baby Boomers or Generation Xers, while some older members may have parents from the Silent Generation. A 2013 poll in the United Kingdom found that Generation Y was more “open-minded than their parents on controversial topics”.[154][166] Of those surveyed, nearly 75% supported same-sex marriage.

A 2013 Pew Research Poll found that 84% of Millennials, born since 1980, who were at that time between the ages of 18 and 32, favored legalizing the use of marijuana.[67] In 2015, the Pew Research Center also conducted research regarding generational identity.[68] It was discovered that Millennials, or members of Generation Y, are less likely to strongly identify with the generational term when compared to Generation X or to the baby boomers, with only 40% of those born between 1981–1997 identifying as part of the Millennial Generation. Among older Millennials, those born 1981–1988, Pew Research found 43% personally identified as members of the older demographic cohort, Generation X, while only 35% identified as Millennials. Among younger Millennials (born 1989–1997), generational identity was not much stronger, with only 45% personally identifying as Millennials. It was also found that Millennials chose most often to define itself with more negative terms such as self-absorbed, wasteful or greedy. In this 2015 report, Pew defined Millennials with birth years ranging from 1981 onwards.[68]

Millennials came of age in a time where the entertainment industry began to be affected by the Internet.[167][168][169] On top of Millennials being the most ethnically and racially diverse compared to the generations older than they are, they are also on pace to be the most educated. As of 2008, 39.6% of Millennials between the ages of 18–24 were enrolled in college, which was an American record. Along with being educated, Millennials are also very upbeat. As stated above in the economic prospects section, about 9 out of 10 Millennials feel as though they have enough money or that they will reach their long-term financial goals, even during the tough economic times, and they are more optimistic about the future of the U.S. Additionally, Millennials are also more open to change than older generations. According to the Pew Research Center that did a survey in 2008, Millennials are the most likely of any generation to self-identify as liberals and are also more supportive of progressive domestic social agenda than older generations. Finally, Millennials are less overtly religious than the older generations. About one in four Millennials are unaffiliated with any religion, which is much more than the older generations when they were the ages of Millennials.[135]

See also

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 845

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 840-844

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 833-839

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 827-832

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 821-826

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 815-820

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 806-814

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 800-805

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 DownloadShows 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 )

The Pronk Pops Show 791, November 7, 2016, Story 1: Trump Tidal Wave Warning: American People Give Trump A 5% Margin Popular Vote Mandate — Pronk Prediction: 50% Trump vs. 45% Clinton — Trump 275 Electoral Votes vs. Clinton 263 Electoral Votes — Trump Wins Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania Becomes President Elect Trump — Narcissist Capitalist Leader In — Narcissist Socialist Appeaser Out — Do Not Blame Me I Elected The George Carlin Option — Videos — Story 2: FBI Director James Comey’s Letters — Return To Sender — FBI Investigations Of Hillary Clinton Are Not Over — Public Corruption Using State Department and Clinton Foundation Investigation Ongoing and Expanding — Videos

Posted on November 7, 2016. Filed under: 2016 Presidential Campaign, 2016 Presidential Candidates, American History, Applications, Benghazi, Blogroll, Breaking News, Bribery, Cartoons, Communications, Computers, Congress, Constitutional Law, Countries, Crime, Culture, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Economics, Education, Fast and Furious, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Foreign Policy, Fourth Amendment, Government, Government Dependency, Government Spending, Hardware, High Crimes, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton, History, House of Representatives, Human, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Impeachment, Independence, Iran Nuclear Weapons Deal, IRS, Law, Legal Immigration, Life, Media, Mike Pence, News, Obama, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, Radio, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Scandals, Second Amendment, Senate, Servers, Software, Success, Taxation, Taxes, Terror, Terrorism, Unemployment, United States Constitution, United States of America, Videos, War, Wealth, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

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 Tidal Wave Warning: American People Give Trump A 5% Margin Popular Vote Mandate  — Pronk Prediction:  50% Trump vs. 45% Clinton — Trump 275 Electoral  Votes vs. Clinton 263 Electoral  Votes — Trump Wins Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania Becomes President Elect Trump — Narcissist Capitalist Leader In — Narcissist Socialist Appeaser Out — Do Not Blame Me I Elected The George Carlin Option — Videos

Image result for cartoons on hillary clinton on public corruption

Image result for cartoons fbi director james comey letters and hillary clinton

Image result for cartoons on hillary clinton on public corruption

Latest Polls

s
Monday, November 7
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Bloomberg Clinton 44, Trump 41, Johnson 4, Stein 2 Clinton +3
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein IBD/TIPP Tracking Clinton 41, Trump 43, Johnson 6, Stein 2 Trump +2
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein CBS News Clinton 45, Trump 41, Johnson 5, Stein 2 Clinton +4
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein FOX News Clinton 48, Trump 44, Johnson 3, Stein 2 Clinton +4
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein ABC/Wash Post Tracking Clinton 47, Trump 43, Johnson 4, Stein 1 Clinton +4
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Monmouth Clinton 50, Trump 44, Johnson 4, Stein 1 Clinton +6
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Rasmussen Reports Clinton 45, Trump 43, Johnson 4, Stein 2 Clinton +2
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein NBC News/SM Clinton 47, Trump 41, Johnson 6, Stein 3 Clinton +6
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton Bloomberg Clinton 46, Trump 43 Clinton +3
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton LA Times/USC Tracking Clinton 43, Trump 48 Trump +5
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton CBS News Clinton 47, Trump 43 Clinton +4
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton IBD/TIPP Tracking Clinton 43, Trump 42 Clinton +1
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton FOX News Clinton 48, Trump 44 Clinton +4
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton ABC/Wash Post Tracking Clinton 49, Trump 46 Clinton +3
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton Monmouth Clinton 50, Trump 44 Clinton +6
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton NBC News/SM Clinton 51, Trump 44 Clinton +7
Florida: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Quinnipiac Clinton 46, Trump 45, Johnson 2, Stein 1 Clinton +1
Florida: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Trafalgar Group (R) Clinton 46, Trump 50, Johnson 2, Stein 1 Trump +4
Florida: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Opinion Savvy Clinton 48, Trump 46, Johnson 3, Stein 1 Clinton +2
Ohio: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Emerson Trump 46, Clinton 39, Johnson 7, Stein 3 Trump +7
North Carolina: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson NY Times/Siena Trump 44, Clinton 44, Johnson 3 Tie
North Carolina: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson Quinnipiac Trump 45, Clinton 47, Johnson 3 Clinton +2
Nevada: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson Emerson* Trump 46, Clinton 47, Johnson 4 Clinton +1
Nevada: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson Remington Research (R) Trump 46, Clinton 45, Johnson 3 Trump +1
New Mexico: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Zia Poll Clinton 46, Trump 44, Johnson 6, Stein 1 Clinton +2
New Hampshire: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Emerson Clinton 45, Trump 44, Johnson 5, Stein 3 Clinton +1
New Hampshire: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein WMUR/UNH Clinton 49, Trump 38, Johnson 6, Stein 1 Clinton +11
Missouri: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Emerson Trump 47, Clinton 41, Johnson 7, Stein 2 Trump +6
Virginia: Trump vs. Clinton Christopher Newport Univ.* Clinton 48, Trump 42 Clinton +6
Florida Senate – Rubio vs. Murphy Quinnipiac Rubio 50, Murphy 43 Rubio +7
North Carolina Senate – Burr vs. Ross NY Times/Siena Burr 46, Ross 45 Burr +1
North Carolina Senate – Burr vs. Ross Quinnipiac Burr 47, Ross 47 Tie
Nevada Senate – Heck vs. Cortez Masto Emerson Cortez Masto 48, Heck 47 Cortez Masto +1
New Hampshire Senate – Ayotte vs. Hassan Emerson Ayotte 49, Hassan 46 Ayotte +3
New Hampshire Senate – Ayotte vs. Hassan WMUR/UNH Ayotte 45, Hassan 49 Hassan +4
Missouri Senate – Blunt vs. Kander Emerson Blunt 45, Kander 46 Kander +1
Ohio Senate – Portman vs. Strickland Emerson Portman 49, Strickland 28 Portman +21
North Carolina Governor – McCrory vs. Cooper NY Times/Siena Cooper 47, McCrory 46 Cooper +1
North Carolina Governor – McCrory vs. Cooper Quinnipiac Cooper 50, McCrory 47 Cooper +3
2016 Generic Congressional Vote Bloomberg Democrats 45, Republicans 48 Republicans +3
Sunday, November 6
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Clinton 44, Trump 40, Johnson 6, Stein 2 Clinton +4
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Clinton 48, Trump 43 Clinton +5
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein IBD/TIPP Tracking Clinton 43, Trump 44, Johnson 5, Stein 2 Trump +1
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton IBD/TIPP Tracking Clinton 45, Trump 44 Clinton +1
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton LA Times/USC Tracking Clinton 43, Trump 48 Trump +5
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein ABC/Wash Post Tracking Clinton 48, Trump 43, Johnson 4, Stein 2 Clinton +5
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton ABC/Wash Post Tracking Clinton 49, Trump 44 Clinton +5
Florida: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein CBS News/YouGov Clinton 45, Trump 45, Johnson 4, Stein 2 Tie
Florida: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Remington Research (R)* Clinton 45, Trump 48, Johnson 2, Stein Trump +3
Ohio: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein CBS News/YouGov Trump 46, Clinton 45, Johnson 3, Stein 2 Trump +1
Ohio: Trump vs. Clinton Columbus Dispatch* Trump 47, Clinton 48 Clinton +1
Ohio: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Remington Research (R)* Trump 45, Clinton 44, Johnson 4, Stein Trump +1
Michigan: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein FOX 2 Detroit/Mitchell Clinton 46, Trump 41, Johnson 7, Stein 3 Clinton +5
Virginia: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Remington Research (R)* Clinton 46, Trump 44, Johnson 4, Stein Clinton +2
New Mexico: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Albuquerque Journal Clinton 45, Trump 40, Johnson 11, Stein 3 Clinton +5
Wisconsin: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Remington Research (R)* Clinton 49, Trump 41, Johnson 3, Stein Clinton +8
New York: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Siena Clinton 51, Trump 34, Johnson 5, Stein 2 Clinton +17
Florida Senate – Rubio vs. Murphy CBS News/YouGov Rubio 47, Murphy 44 Rubio +3
Ohio Senate – Portman vs. Strickland CBS News/YouGov Portman 52, Strickland 39 Portman +13
Ohio Senate – Portman vs. Strickland Columbus Dispatch* Portman 58, Strickland 37 Portman +21
New York Senate – Long vs. Schumer Siena Schumer 67, Long 25 Schumer +42
President Obama Job Approval Gallup Approve 53, Disapprove 44 Approve +9
Saturday, November 5
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton LA Times/USC Tracking Clinton 43, Trump 48 Trump +5
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein IBD/TIPP Tracking Clinton 44, Trump 44, Johnson 5, Stein 2 Tie
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton IBD/TIPP Tracking Clinton 46, Trump 43 Clinton +3
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Reuters/Ipsos Clinton 43, Trump 39, Johnson 6, Stein 2 Clinton +4
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton Reuters/Ipsos Clinton 44, Trump 40 Clinton +4
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Gravis Clinton 47, Trump 45, Johnson 3, Stein 1 Clinton +2
Pennsylvania: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Morning Call Clinton 44, Trump 40, Johnson 7, Stein 2 Clinton +4
Pennsylvania: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Gravis Clinton 47, Trump 45, Johnson 2, Stein 2 Clinton +2
Iowa: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Des Moines Register Trump 46, Clinton 39, Johnson 6, Stein 1 Trump +7
Iowa: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Loras Trump 43, Clinton 44, Johnson 3, Stein 3 Clinton +1
Colorado: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Gravis Clinton 40, Trump 40, Johnson 7, Stein 4 Tie
Washington: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein SurveyUSA Clinton 50, Trump 38, Johnson 4, Stein 2 Clinton +12
Pennsylvania Senate – Toomey vs. McGinty Gravis McGinty 45, Toomey 43 McGinty +2
Pennsylvania Senate – Toomey vs. McGinty Morning Call McGinty 42, Toomey 43 Toomey +1
Iowa Senate – Grassley vs. Judge Des Moines Register Grassley 56, Judge 33 Grassley +23
Colorado Senate – Glenn vs. Bennet Gravis Bennet 47, Glenn 44 Bennet +3
Iowa Senate – Grassley vs. Judge Loras* Grassley 53, Judge 37 Grassley +16
Washington Governor – Bryant vs. Inslee SurveyUSA Inslee 50, Bryant 43 Inslee +7
Iowa 1st District – Blum vs. Vernon Loras Blum 47, Vernon 41 Blum +6
Iowa 3rd District – Young vs. Mowrer Loras Young 44, Mowrer 39 Young +5

OMG!!! Last Update Trump 59% Hillary 34%

If You are a Voter You Should see this Video

Donald Trump Speech Today 11/07/16 Rally at Sarasota, Florida ( FULL )

The O’Reilly Factor 11/6/16 | Who Will Win Pennsylvania? – Trump Vs Clinton – Race In America

SR 1314 – Trump Will CRUSH Crooked Hillary Clinton – Latest Electoral College Map Prediction

Can GOP turn Pennsylvania red in 2016?

6 ways Trump could win 270 electoral votes and win the election

Trey Gowdy Explosive Interview Today 11/ 6/16 W Megyn Kelly FBI Director J. Comey H Clinton decision

George Carlin -Question Everything

George Carlin -“Who Really Controls America”

YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS – George Carlin

George Carlin – Why I Don’t Vote

Story 2: FBI Director James Comey’s Letters — Return To Sender — Videos  

Image result for cartoons fbi director james comey

Image result for cartoons fbi director james comey

Image result for cartoons fbi director james comey letters and hillary clinton

Image result for cartoons fbi director james comey letters and hillary clinton

Image result for cartoons fbi director james comey letters and hillary clinton

Lou Dobbs Tonight 11/6/16 James Comey clears Clinton once again after 2ND FBI email investigation

RUSH: What If Comey Says ‘THERE’S NOTHING THERE’

Rush Limbaugh EXPLAINS What Happened With FBI, Comey, Investigation of Hillary Email

FBI Director Comey releases new letter to Congress

Image result for cartoons fbi director james comey letters and hillary clinton

 

Image result for comey second letter November 6, 2016

Image result for comey letter November 6, 2016

FBI FINDS HILLARY CLINTON GUILTY! JASON CHAFFETZ AND FBI DIRECTOR COMEY AGREE

Breaking: Jim Jordan Gets FBI Director To Confirm Cover Up of Evidence Tampering

Rep. Gowdy Questions FBI Director Comey

FBI Director James Comey Reveals Findings in Hillary Clinton Email Probe – No Charges Appropriate

FBI SUBPOENA SERVED !! • U.S. REP. JASON CHAFFETZ DELIVERED A SUBPOENA TO FBI #lockherup

Read the full text of James Comey’s letter on the new Clinton emails

Here is the full text of the letter written Sunday to lawmakers by FBI Director James Comey.

In it, Comey says his agency’s review of newly discovered emails has not changed his earlier conclusion that Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton should not be prosecuted for her handling of classified information while secretary of state.

Dear Messrs. Chairmen:

I write to supplement my October 28, 2016 letter that notified you the FBI would be taking additional investigative steps with respect to former Secretary of State Clinton’s use of a personal email server. Since my letter, the FBI investigative team has been working around the clock to process and review a large volume of emails from a device obtained in connection with an unrelated criminal investigation. During that process, we reviewed all of the communications that were to or from Hillary Clinton while she was Secretary of State.

Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton.

I am very grateful to the professionals at the FBI for doing an extraordinary amount of high-quality work in a short period of time.

Sincerely yours,
James B. Comey
Director

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/11/06/read-full-text-comeys-letter-new-clinton-emails/93398304/

‘You can’t review 650,000 new emails in eight days!’ Furious Trump blasts FBI Director after Houdini Hillary is CLEARED over second email investigation sparked by Anthony Weiner’s teen sexting scandal

  • FBI announced it will not change the decision it reached in July after investigating Hillary Clinton’s emails
  • Director James Comey announced the potentially election-changing news in an email on Sunday afternoon
  • The latest finding means the Democratic nominee will not be charged with anything from the email scandal 
  • Hillary’s camp addressed Comey’s letter after it was published, saying it is ‘glad that the matter is resolved’
  • Donald Trump was quick to trash the latest decision, saying Clinton is being protected by a ‘rigged system’ 

Donald Trump blasted the FBI’s director on Sunday night, telling a crowd of 8,000 people in Michigan that he rejects the bureau’s latest move to exonerate Hillary Clinton.

FBI chief James Comey told leaders in Congress hours earlier that a review of 650,000 emails discovered on a laptop belonging to Anthony Weiner had reinforced his July 5 decision to let her off the hook.

‘The investigations into her crimes will go on for a long, long time,’ Trump said in the Detroit suburb of Sterling Heights.

‘The rank-and-file special agents in the FBI won’t let her get away with her terrible crimes – including the deletion of 33,000 emails after receiving a congressional subpoena.’

‘Right now she’s being protected by a rigged system!’ he exclaimed.

‘You can’t review 650,000 new emails in eight days! You can’t do it, folks!’

While campaigning in Sterling Heights, Michigan on Sunday evening, Donald Trump (above) addressed the FBI's announcement about closing the investigation into Clinton's email server

While campaigning in Sterling Heights, Michigan on Sunday evening, Donald Trump (above) addressed the FBI’s announcement about closing the investigation into Clinton’s email server

The Republican presidential candidate insisted that it would have been impossible for the FBI to review what has been reported to be as many as 650,000 emails in so short a time 

The Republican presidential candidate insisted that it would have been impossible for the FBI to review what has been reported to be as many as 650,000 emails in so short a time

Trump (above) said: 'The rank-and-file special agents in the FBI won't let her get away with her terrible crimes – including the deletion of 33,000 emails after receiving a congressional subpoena.

Trump (above) said: 'Right now she's being protected by a rigged system!'

Trump (above) said: ‘The rank-and-file special agents in the FBI won’t let her get away with her terrible crimes – including the deletion of 33,000 emails after receiving a congressional subpoena. Right now she’s being protected by a rigged system!’

Comey’s decision means the Democratic presidential nominee will not be charged with a crime related to her mishandling of thousands of classified documents on a homebrew email server she used while she was secretary of state.

Congressman Jason Chaffetz fist tweeted out the bombshell news Sunday afternoon before FBI Director James Comey released a letter that said the investigation was closed.

‘FBI Dir just informed us ‘Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Sec Clinton’,’ Chaffetz wrote.

Speaking to reporters with Clinton in Cleveland, Ohio, campaign communications director Jennifer Palmieri said: ‘We have seen Director Comey’s latest letter to the [Capitol] Hill. We are glad to see that he has found, as we were confident that he would, that he has confirmed the conclusion that he reached in July, and we’re glad that this matter is resolved.’

The investigation was reopened on October 28 – sparked by a DailyMail.com story that revealed Weiner was sending sexually explicit messages to a 15-year-old girl. The emails in question were found on Weiner’s laptop.

Hillary Clinton (pictured on Sunday morning) was all smiles after being again cleared by the FBI after the investigation into her emails was reopened

Hillary Clinton (pictured on Sunday morning) was all smiles after being again cleared by the FBI after the investigation into her emails was reopened

At the rally in Michigan on Sunday, Trump (above) declared, 'Hillary Clinton is guilty. She knows it, the FBI knows it, the people know it.'

At the rally in Michigan on Sunday, Trump (above) declared, ‘Hillary Clinton is guilty. She knows it, the FBI knows it, the people know it.’

 

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 785-791

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 Download Shows 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 )

The Pronk Pops Show 682, May 19, 2016, Story 1: New York Times Hit On Trump Fails — Trump Fires Back At NYT, Hillary and Bill Clinton War on Women and Rape — Trump List of Potential Supreme Court Appointments — Breaking: Egyptian Airline Crashes — Videos

Posted on May 19, 2016. Filed under: 2016 Presidential Campaign, 2016 Presidential Candidates, American History, Blogroll, Breaking News, College, Communications, Congress, Constitutional Law, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, History, House of Representatives, Law, Media, News, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Senate, Videos, Wall Street Journal, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 682: May 19, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 681: May 17, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 680: May 16, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 679: May 13, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 678: May 12, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 677: May 11, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 676: May 10, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 675: May 9, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 674: May 6, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 673: May 5, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 672: May 4, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 671: May 3, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 670: May 2, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 669: April 29, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 668: April 28, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 667: April 27, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 666: April 26, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 665: April 25, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 664: April 24, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 663: April 21, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 662: April 20, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 661: April 19, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 660: April 18, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 659: April 15, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 658: April 14, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 657: April 13, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 656: April 12, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 655: April 11, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 654: April 8, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 653: April 7, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 652: April 6, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 651: April 4, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 650: April 1, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 649: March 31, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 648: March 30, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 647: March 29, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 646: March 28, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 645: March 24, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 644: March 23, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 643: March 22, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 642: March 21, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 641: March 11, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 640: March 10, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 639: March 9, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 638: March 8, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 637: March 7, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 636: March 4, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 635: March 3, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 634: March 2, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 633: March 1, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 632: February 29, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 631: February 25, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 630: February 24, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 629: February 22, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 628: February 19, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 627: February 18, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 626: February 17, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 625: February 16, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 624: February 15, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 623: February 12, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 622: February 11, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 621: February 10, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 620: February 9, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 619: February 8, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 618: February 5, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 617: February 4, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 616: February 3, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 615: February 1, 2016

Story 1: New York Times Hit On Trump Fails — Trump Fires Back At NYT, Hillary and Bill Clinton War on Women and Rape — Trump List of Potential Supreme Court Appointments — Breaking: Egyptian Airline Crashes — Videos

airliner crashesEgyptAir-flight-MS804egyptair-plane

trump supreme court picks

The Green Papers
2016 Presidential Primaries, Caucuses, and Conventions
Copyright www.flags.net/UNST.htm Republican Convention
Presidential Nominating Process
Debate –  Fox – Cleveland, Ohio: Thursday 6 August 2015
Debate – CNN – Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, Simi Valley, California: Wednesday 16 September 2015
Debate – CNBC – Boulder, Colorado: Wednesday 28 October 2015
Debate – Fox Business News – Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Tuesday 10 November 2015
Debate – CNN – Las Vegas, Nevada: Tuesday 15 December 2015
Debate – Fox Business Channel, Charleston, South Carolina: Thursday 14 January 2016
Debate – Fox – Iowa: Thursday 28 January 2016
Debate – CBS – South Carolina: February 2016 (presumably)
Debate – NBC/Telemundo – Texas: Friday 26 February 2016
Debate – CNN – TBD: March 2016 (presumably)
Debate – Salt Lake City, Utah (announced 20 February 2016): Monday 21 March 2016
41st Republican National Convention: Monday 18 July – Thursday 21 July 2016
Republicans
Candidate Popular
Vote
Delegate Votes
Soft
Pledged
Soft
Unpledged
Soft
Total
Hard Total
Trump, Donald John, Sr. 11,266,041  40.97% 1,107  46.85% 61  55.96% 1,168  47.25% 1,098  44.42%
Cruz, Rafael Edward “Ted” 7,454,467  27.11% 555  23.49% 19  17.43% 574  23.22% 551  22.29%
Kasich, John Richard 3,874,189  14.09% 160   6.77% 3   2.75% 163   6.59% 160   6.47%
Rubio, Marco A. 3,508,250  12.76% 168   7.11%   168   6.80% 173   7.00%
Carson, Benjamin Solomon “Ben”, Sr. 746,657   2.72% 7   0.30%   7   0.28% 9   0.36%
Bush, John Ellis “Jeb” 279,346   1.02% 4   0.17%   4   0.16% 4   0.16%
Uncommitted 72,667   0.26% 12   0.51% 10   9.17% 22   0.89% 124   5.02%
Paul, Randal H. “Rand” 66,711   0.24% 1   0.04%   1   0.04% 1   0.04%
Christie, Christopher James “Chris” 57,590   0.21%        
Huckabee, Michael Dale “Mike” 51,367   0.19% 1   0.04%   1   0.04% 1   0.04%
Fiorina, Carleton Sneed “Carly” 39,006   0.14% 1   0.04%   1   0.04% 1   0.04%
(others) 33,048   0.12%        
Santorum, Richard John “Rick” 16,598   0.06%        
No Preference 9,299   0.03%        
Graham, Lindsey Olin 5,663   0.02%        
Gray, Elizabeth 5,449   0.02%        
Others 3,911   0.01%        
Gilmore, James Stuart “Jim”, III 2,673   0.01%        
Pataki, George E. 2,036   0.01%        
Scattering 1,381   0.01%        
Cook, Timothy “Tim” 517   0.00%        
Jindal, Piyush “Bobby” 222   0.00%        
Hall, David Eames 204   0.00%        
Martin, Andy 202   0.00%        
Spoiled ballots 137   0.00%        
Witz, Richard P.H. 104   0.00%        
Lynch, James P. “Jim”, Sr. 100   0.00%        
Messina, Peter 79   0.00%        
Cullison, Brooks Andrews 56   0.00%        
Lynch, Frank 47   0.00%        
Robinson, Joe 44   0.00%        
Williams, Victor 39   0.00%        
Comley, Stephen Bradley, Sr. 32   0.00%        
Prag, Chomi 16   0.00%        
Breivogel, JoAnn 16   0.00%        
Dyas, Jacob Daniel “Daniel”, Sr. 15   0.00%        
McCarthy, Stephen John 12   0.00%        
Iwachiw, Walter N. 9   0.00%        
Huey, Kevin Glenn 8   0.00%        
Drozd, Matt 6   0.00%        
Mann, Robert Lawrence 5   0.00%        
(available)   347  14.68% 16  14.68% 363  14.68% 350  14.16%
Total 27,498,219 100.00% 2,363 100.00% 109 100.00% 2,472 100.00% 2,472 100.00%

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/R

BREAKING: EgyptAir flight MS-804 from Paris to Cairo disappears from radar!

Who are Donald Trump’s Supreme Court picks?

Trump Releases His List of Potential Supreme Court Picks to Replace Justice Scalia

Donald Trump Attacks Bill Clinton Calling Him a ‘Rapist’

Donald Trump INTERVIEW Sean Hannity – Bill Clinton RAPE Allegations – VP Picks – The New York Times

Mark Levin: Donald Trump released the list of his potential Supreme Court nominees (May 18 2016)

Donald Trump unveils possible Supreme Court nominees

Supreme Court Expert Analyzes Donald Trump’s High Court Nominees

Donald Trump Announces Shortlist For SCOTUS | MSNBC

Trump Releases List Of 11 Potential Supreme Court Nominees – Judge Andrew Napolitano – Cavuto

Juanita Hillary Clinton / Bill Clinton Rape Victim Exposed! War On Women

NY Time Hit Piece On Donald Trump Falling Apart – Hannity

Omarosa: NY Times Trump article is textbook hit job

Donald Trump’s Ex-Girlfriend Refutes NYT Story: ‘He Was A Gentleman’ | MSNBC

Joe: New York Times Overreached On Donald Trump Again | Morning Joe | MSNBC

Texas Supreme Court justice makes Donald Trump’s SCOTUS short list

Donald Trump Releases Names of 11 Potential Supreme Court Choices

Presumptive Republican nominee for president discloses possible candidates to prove his conservative credentials

By BRENT KENDALL

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump on Wednesday listed 11 candidates he would consider to fill the vacancy at the Supreme Court, a move aimed at easing concerns on the right about his commitment to conservative judges.

The list includes six federal appeals-court judges appointed by former Republican President George W. Bush, as well as five state Supreme Court justices with conservative credentials.

The roster of potential nominees prompted split reactions from Republicans, Democrats and advocacy groups that see judicial nominations as a priority, particularly for issues such as abortion.

READ MORE ON CAPITAL JOURNAL

Capital Journal is WSJ.com’s home for politics, policy and national security news.

Who’s Who on Trump’s Wish List
Trump Filing Details His Sources of Income
For Clinton and Trump, Negatives May Be Hard to Overcome Before November
House GOP Plans Another Attack Against IRS Commissioner John Koskinen
Democrats Fear an Unruly Convention
Donald Trump and the Republican National Committee struck a deal to establish joint fundraising committees, which allow donors to write bigger checks ahead of the general election. WSJ’s Shelby Holliday explains how the joint effort works. Photo: Getty Images
The direction of the Supreme Court has been a front-and-center issue in the presidential race since Justice Antonin Scalia’s death in February. The current court is split evenly between liberals and conservatives. The next president could determine the court’s direction for years to come, particularly if multiple high-court vacancies arise.

In a statement Wednesday, Mr. Trump said his list “is representative of the kind of constitutional principles I value and, as president, I plan to use this list as a guide.” He has said he would as president seek to use the Supreme Court to restrict abortion, a primary goal of social conservatives.
The federal judges on Mr. Trump’s short list are Steven Colloton, Raymond Gruender, Thomas Hardiman, Raymond Kethledge, William Pryor and Diane Sykes.

Judge Colloton was on an Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel that last year ruled the Obama administration hadn’t done enough to accommodate religious employers who objected to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception insurance requirement.

The Supreme Court reached something of a stalemate on the issue this week, sending several cases back to the lower courts for a possible compromise between the government and the objectors.

Judge Pryor was the subject of a previous heated political battle between Republicans and Democrats over his appointment to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, at least in part because liberal groups viewed him as hostile to abortion rights.

Mr. Bush bypassed Democrats and installed Judge Pryor on the court with a recess appointment. A year later, he received Senate confirmation after a bipartisan group of lawmakers reached a compromise on some judicial nominations.

Judge William Pryor’s appointment to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was the subject of a heated political battle. ENLARGE
Judge William Pryor’s appointment to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was the subject of a heated political battle. PHOTO: JOHN AMIS/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Utah Supreme Court Justice Thomas Lee ENLARGE
Utah Supreme Court Justice Thomas Lee PHOTO: FRANCISCO KJOLSETH/ASSOCIATED PRESS
The five state Supreme Court justices on Mr. Trump’s list are Allison Eid of Colorado, Joan Larsen of Michigan, Thomas Lee of Utah, David Stras of Minnesota and Don Willett of Texas.

Justice Lee is the brother of GOP Sen. Mike Lee of Utah. Justice Willett, aside from his jurisprudence, has gained a following because he is the rare judge who is an active participant on Twitter. His more than 21,000 tweets have included occasional jabs at Mr. Trump.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R., Iowa), a central figure in preventing Senate consideration of President Barack Obama’s high-court nominee Merrick Garland, said Mr. Trump had “laid out an impressive list of highly qualified jurists.” The Susan B. Anthony List, an anti-abortion group, said Mr. Trump’s list was “exceptionally strong.”

The abortion-rights group Naral Pro-Choice America called the candidates “a woman’s worst nightmare,” because they could threaten Roe v. Wade, the high-court decision that established the right to an abortion.

While acknowledging he hadn’t seen the list, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said, “I would be surprised if there are any Democrats who would describe any of those 11 individuals as a consensus nominee.”

 

Many of the judges on Mr. Trump’s list previously served as law clerks to conservative Supreme Court justices.

The list in some ways echoes Mr. Trump’s anti-establishment campaign. He didn’t include any conservative judges on Washington’s powerful federal appeals court or any prominent conservative Washington lawyers like Paul Clement. Many of the nominees hail from the Midwest and most received their legal training as schools other than Harvard or Yale, whose alumni dominate the current Supreme Court.

A few days ago, Mark Meckler, president of Citizens for Self Governance and a founder of the Tea Party Patriots, recommended Mr. Trump release a list of his potential Supreme Court justices to address concerns about his conservative credentials among tea party activists. “I would suggest if I was an adviser to Trump that he name some judges he’d be interested in elevating to the Supreme Court,” he said.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-releases-names-of-11-potential-supreme-court-choices-1463598588

Donald Trump releases list of 11 potential Supreme Court nominees

//

Trump unveils list of 11 potential Supreme Court picks

Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, on Wednesday released a list of 11 potential Supreme Court nominees he would appoint if elected president, including to fill the vacancy left by Justice Antonin Scalia.

The list is meant to reassure conservatives that his picks would be in line with their positions and help allay lingering reservations.

Top picks include conservative federal and state judges like Steven Colloton of Iowa, Allison Eid of Colorado and Raymond Gruender of Missouri.

Also on the list are: Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania, Raymond Kethledge of Michigan, Joan Larsen of Michigan, Thomas Lee of Utah, William Pryor of Alabama, David Stras of Minnesota, Diane Sykes of Wisconsin and Don Willett of Texas. Trump had previously named Pryor and Sykes as examples of kind of justices he would choose.

The news comes as Trump is working to bring together a fractured Republican Party and earn the trust of still-skeptical establishment Republicans who question his electability in the general election, as well as conservatives in his party still wary of his commitment to their cause.

Why did the presumptive GOP nominee select the 11 potential candidates to fill Justice Scalia's seat? What was his criteria? A senior Trump adviser goes 'On the Record'

In a statement, Trump said the list “is representative of the kind of constitutional principles I value” and said that, as president, he would use it “as a guide to nominate our next United States Supreme Court Justices.”

The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics.See Latest Coverage →

His campaign stressed the list was compiled “first and foremost, based on constitutional principles, with input from highly respected conservatives and Republican Party leadership.”

Why did the presumptive GOP nominee release the list now? Insight on 'The Real Story'

In an interview Wednesday night with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, Trump said he wants people of “high intellect” on his list to replace the seat held by Scalia.

“I have a lot of people that are conservative that really like me, love everything I stand for, but they really would like to know my view because perhaps outside of the defense of our country, perhaps the single most important thing the next president is going to have to do is pick Supreme Court justices,” he told Hannity.

Larsen, who serves on the Michigan Supreme Court and is a former law clerk to Scalia, delivered one of the tributes to the late justice at his memorial service in March. She served in the Justice Department office that produced the legal justifications for the enhanced interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, that critics have called torture.

Willett, a justice on the Texas Supreme Court, is perhaps best known for his heavy use of social media. His Twitter handle, (at)justicewillett, has more than 35,000 followers.

Willett however has repeatedly mocked Trump on Twitter.

Pryor was initially given a recess appointment to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals by President George W. Bush. Senate Democrats had tried to block Pryor’s appointments over his strong criticism of the Roe v. Wade decision that established a woman’s right to an abortion.

Apart from Sykes, who is 58, the others all are younger than 55 and David Stras is just 41. The eight men and three women on the list are all white.

Trump’s list is also notable for the names that don’t appear. It omits two of the biggest stars in the conservative legal world, Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the federal appeals court in Washington, and former Bush administration Solicitor General Paul Clement.

Trump first said in March that he planned to release the list of five to 10 judges in an effort to ease concerns about his conservative credentials, which had come under attack in the heated Republican primary.

“I am going to give a list of either five or 10 judges that I will pick, 100 percent pick, that I will put in for nomination. Because some of the people that are against me say: `We don’t know if he’s going to pick the right judge. Supposing he picks a liberal judge or supposing he picks a pro-choice judge,”‘ Trump said at an event in Palm Beach, Florida.

He said then the list would include judges “that everybody respects, likes and totally admires” — “great conservative judges, great intellects, the people that you want.”

The vow marked a rare moment of acknowledgment by Trump that he could be doing more to appease those in his party opposed his candidacy.

Trump had said he would like to appoint judges in the mold of deeply conservative as Scalia, who died in February.

In the statement, he described Scalia as “a remarkable person and a brilliant Supreme Court Justice.”

“His career was defined by his reverence for the Constitution and his legacy of protecting Americans’ most cherished freedoms,” he added. “He was a justice who did not believe in legislating from the bench and he is a person whom I held in the highest regard and will always greatly respect his intelligence and conviction to uphold the Constitution of our country.”

“Donald Trump’s list of potential Supreme Court nominees are a woman’s worst nightmare,” Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America said in a statement. “His vision appears to be turning the court into an ideological instrument instead of an arbiter of the bedrock values of our country -justice, freedom, and equality.”

The Susan B. Anthony List, a pro-life non-profit, called Trump’s list an “exceptionally strong list of jurists with immense respect for our founding documents.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/18/trump-unveils-list-11-potential-supreme-court-justices.html

Crossing the Line: How Donald Trump
Behaved With Women in Private

Interviews reveal unwelcome advances, a shrewd reliance on ambition, and unsettling workplace conduct over decades.

 

Donald J. Trump had barely met Rowanne Brewer Lane when he asked her to change out of her clothes.

Donald was having a pool party at Mar-a-Lago. There were about 50 models and 30 men. There were girls in the pools, splashing around. For some reason Donald seemed a little smitten with me. He just started talking to me and nobody else.

He suddenly took me by the hand, and he started to show me around the mansion. He asked me if I had a swimsuit with me. I said no. I hadn’t intended to swim. He took me into a room and opened drawers and asked me to put on a swimsuit.

Ms. Brewer Lane, at the time a 26-year-old model, did as Mr. Trump asked. “I went into the bathroom and tried one on,” she recalled. It was a bikini. “I came out, and he said, ‘Wow.’ ”

Mr. Trump, then 44 and in the midst of his first divorce, decided to show her off to the crowd at Mar-a-Lago, his estate in Palm Beach, Fla.

“He brought me out to the pool and said, ‘That is a stunning Trump girl, isn’t it?’ ” Ms. Brewer Lane said.

Donald Trump and women: The words evoke a familiar cascade of casual insults, hurled from the safe distance of a Twitter account, a radio show or a campaign podium. This is the public treatment of some women by Mr. Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for president: degrading, impersonal, performed. “That must be a pretty picture, you dropping to your knees,” he told a female contestant on “The Celebrity Apprentice.” Rosie O’Donnell, he said, had a “fat, ugly face.” A lawyer who needed to pump milk for a newborn? “Disgusting,” he said.

But the 1990 episode at Mar-a-Lago that Ms. Brewer Lane described was different: a debasing face-to-face encounter between Mr. Trump and a young woman he hardly knew. This is the private treatment of some women by Mr. Trump, the up-close and more intimate encounters.

 

Rowanne Brewer Lane, who met Mr. Trump when she was a 26-year-old model.
Credit Travis Dove for The New York Times
The New York Times interviewed dozens of women who had worked with or for Mr. Trump over the past four decades, in the worlds of real estate, modeling and pageants; women who had dated him or interacted with him socially; and women and men who had closely observed his conduct since his adolescence. In all, more than 50 interviews were conducted over the course of six weeks.

Their accounts — many relayed here in their own words — reveal unwelcome romantic advances, unending commentary on the female form, a shrewd reliance on ambitious women, and unsettling workplace conduct, according to the interviews, as well as court records and written recollections. The interactions occurred in his offices at Trump Tower, at his homes, at construction sites and backstage at beauty pageants. They appeared to be fleeting, unimportant moments to him, but they left lasting impressions on the women who experienced them.

What emerges from the interviews is a complex, at times contradictory portrait of a wealthy, well-known and provocative man and the women around him, one that defies simple categorization. Some women found him gracious and encouraging. He promoted several to the loftiest heights of his company, a daring move for a major real estate developer at the time.

He simultaneously nurtured women’s careers and mocked their physical appearance. “You like your candy,” he told an overweight female executive who oversaw the construction of his headquarters in Midtown Manhattan. He could be lewd one moment and gentlemanly the next.

In an interview, Mr. Trump described himself as a champion of women, someone who took pride in hiring them and was in awe of their work ethic. “It would just seem,” he said, “that there was something that they want to really prove.”

Pressed on the women’s claims, Mr. Trump disputed many of the details, such as asking Ms. Brewer Lane to put on a swimsuit. “A lot of things get made up over the years,” he said. “I have always treated women with great respect. And women will tell you that.”

 

Ms. Brewer Lane and Mr. Trump dated in the early 1990s. Credit via Rowanne Brewer Lane
But in many cases there was an unmistakable dynamic at play: Mr. Trump had the power, and the women did not. He had celebrity. He had wealth. He had connections. Even after he had behaved crudely toward them, some of the women sought his assistance with their careers or remained by his side.

For Ms. Brewer Lane, her introduction to Mr. Trump at Mar-a-Lago was the start of a whirlwind romance — a heady blur of helicopter rides and high-end hotel rooms and flashing cameras.

“It was intimidating,” she said. “He was Donald Trump, obviously.”

Boarding School ‘Ladies’ Man’

It started at the New York Military Academy, a small, severe boarding school 90 minutes’ drive north of New York City. Strictly enforced rules prohibited girls from setting foot on the all-boys campus unless it was a special occasion. And on those special occasions, young Donald Trump paid careful mind to the kind of girls he brought to school. They had to be gorgeous — 10s, in his future parlance.

“Donald was extremely sensitive to whether or not the women he invited to campus were pretty,” recalled George White, a fellow student in the class of 1964.

“For Donald,” he added, “it’s display.”

Photo

Mr. Trump in the New York Military Academy’s 1964 yearbook.
He steadily built an image as a young playboy amid the deprivations of a single-sex military school, where most boys craved but rarely enjoyed the company of a girl. By senior year, his classmates had crowned him “ladies’ man” in the yearbook, a nod to the volume of his dates.

He wasn’t bringing the same girl. He had a variety of girls coming up. Donald was bringing in very pretty women, very sophisticated women and very well-dressed women. You could always tell they were of a higher class.

–George White, high school classmate

Asked how he had earned the “ladies’ man” title, Mr. Trump at first demurred. “I better not tell you — I’ll get myself in trouble,” he said. He later elaborated, saying he had “a great feeling” and “a great like” for women.

The Alpha Trump

Mr. Trump grew up with an influential role model for how to deal with women: Fred C. Trump, his powerful and unyielding father.

I can understand the comments criticizing the Times for running this type of story. I can understand the comments criticizing the tone of…
lds 19 hours ago
Now that this story has been debunked I assume this changes many of the heavily recommended comments? and opinions?
Zack 22 hours ago
Will the NYT print a retraction re: Rowanne Brewer Lane’s pushback on the Times’ slant?Lane said – “Obviously they feel like they need to do…
SEE ALL COMMENTS
The elder Mr. Trump exerted control no matter how big or small the decision, as Ivana Zelnickova learned over dinner one night in the late 1970s. Her boyfriend, Donald Trump, had invited her to join his siblings and parents at Tavern on the Green, the ornate restaurant in Central Park.

When the waiter came to take orders, Ivana made the mistake of asking for what she wanted. Fred Trump set her straight, she recalled in a previously unpublished interview with Michael D’Antonio, the author of “The Truth About Trump.”

Fred would order steak. Then Donald would order steak. … Everybody order steak. I told the waiter, “I would like to have fish.” O.K., so I could have the fish. And Fred would say to the waiter: “No, Ivana is not going to have a fish. She is going to have a steak.” I said, “No, I’m going to have my fish.” And Donald would come home and say, “Ivana, why would you have a fish instead of a steak?” I say, “Because I’m not going to be told by somebody to have something which I don’t want.”

–Ivana Trump, ex-wife

Mr. Trump defended his father’s conduct. “He would’ve said that out of love,” he said. If his father had overruled her fish order, Mr. Trump said, “he would have said that only on the basis that he thought, ‘That would be better for her.’ ”

The elder Mr. Trump did not hide his more traditional views on gender. When his son hired a woman, Barbara A. Res, as his head of construction in the 1980s, Fred Trump was mystified and annoyed.

Fred did not like the idea that Donald had hired me. “A woman?” Donald told me that. But I could tell by the way Fred treated me. He used to say that all the time: “You don’t know what you are talking about.” When I would complain to Donald about Fred, he would say, “Fred didn’t want me to hire you or didn’t think it was a woman’s job.”

–Barbara A. Res, former Trump executive and author of “All Alone on the 68th Floor”

Mr. Trump said it was a different era. “My father,” he said, “probably never would have seen a woman in that position.”

Mr. Trump still holds up his parents as models, praising his stay-at-home mother for understanding and accommodating a husband who worked almost nonstop.

“My mother was always fine with it,” he said, recalling her “brilliant” management of the situation. “If something got interrupted because he was going to inspect a housing site or something, she would handle that so beautifully.”

“She was an ideal woman,” he said.

The Company of Women

With his purchase of the Miss Universe Organization, Mr. Trump was now in the business of young, beautiful women.

They craved his advice and approval, a fact he seemed to understand well.

Temple Taggart, the 21-year-old Miss Utah, was startled by how forward he was with young contestants like her in 1997, his first year as the owner of Miss USA, a branch of the beauty pageant organization. As she recalls it, he introduced himself in an unusually intimate manner.

He kissed me directly on the lips. I thought, “Oh my God, gross.” He was married to Marla Maples at the time. I think there were a few other girls that he kissed on the mouth. I was like “Wow, that’s inappropriate.”

–Temple Taggart, 1997 Miss Utah USA

Mr. Trump disputes this, saying he is reluctant to kiss strangers on the lips. But Ms. Taggart said it was not an isolated incident.

Photo

Mr. Trump onstage with Miss USA contestants in 1998. Credit John Sleezer/Kansas City Star, via Associated Press
At the gala celebration after the show, she said, Mr. Trump immediately zeroed in on her, telling her how much he liked her style and inviting her to visit him in New York to talk about her future. Soon enough, she said, he delivered another unwelcome kiss on her lips, this time in Trump Tower. After boasting of his connections to elite modeling agencies, he advised her to lie about her age to get ahead in the industry, she said.

“ ‘We’re going to have to tell them you’re 17,’ ” Ms. Taggart recalled him telling her, “because in his mind, 21 is too old. I was like, ‘No, we’re not going to do that.’ ”

His level of involvement in the pageants was unexpected, and his judgments, the contestants said, could be harsh. Carrie Prejean, who was 21 when she participated in the Miss USA contest in 2009 as Miss California, was surprised to find Mr. Trump personally evaluating the women at rehearsal. “We were told to put on our opening number outfits — they were nearly as revealing as our swimsuits — and line up for him onstage,” she wrote in her memoir, “Still Standing.”

Donald Trump walked out with his entourage and inspected us closer than any general ever inspected a platoon. He would stop in front of a girl, look her up and down, and say, “Hmmm.” Then he would go on and do the same thing to the next girl. He took notes on a little pad as he went along. After he did this, Trump said: “O.K. I want all the girls to come forward.” …

Donald Trump looked at Miss Alabama.

“Come here,” he said.

She took one more step forward.

“Tell me, who’s the most beautiful woman here?”

Miss Alabama’s eyes swam around.

“Besides me?” she said. “Uh, I like Arkansas. She’s sweet.”

“I don’t care if she’s sweet,” Donald Trump said. “Is she hot?” …

It became clear that the point of the whole exercise was for him to divide the room between girls he personally found attractive and those he did not. Many of the girls found the exercise humiliating. Some of the girls were sobbing backstage after he left, devastated to have failed even before the competition really began to impress “The Donald.”

–Carrie Prejean, 2009 Miss California USA

Mr. Trump, in an interview, said he would “never do that.” Such behavior, he said, would bruise egos and hurt feelings. “I wouldn’t hurt people,” he said. “That’s hurtful to people.”

A Preoccupation With Bodies

Mr. Trump was not just fixated on the appearance of the women around him. He possessed an almost compulsive need to talk about it.

Inside the Trump Organization, the company that manages his various businesses, he occasionally interrupted routine discussions of business to opine on women’s figures. Ms. Res, his construction executive, remembered a meeting in which she and Mr. Trump interviewed an architect for a project in the Los Angeles area. Out of the blue, she said, Mr. Trump evaluated the fitness of women in Marina del Rey, Calif. “They take care of their asses,” he said.

Continue reading the main story
Photo

Barbara A. Res, who was hired as Mr. Trump’s head of construction in the 1980s.
Credit Todd Heisler/The New York Times
“The architect and I didn’t know where he was coming from,” Ms. Res said. Years later, after she had gained a significant amount of weight, Ms. Res endured a stinging workplace observation about her own body from Mr. Trump. “ ‘You like your candy,’ ” she recalled him telling her. “It was him reminding me that I was overweight.”

Her colleague Louise Sunshine experienced similar observations from Mr. Trump when she gained weight. But she saw it as friendly encouragement, not a cruel insult. “He thought I looked much better thin,” she said. “He would remind me of how beautiful I was.”

Whenever possible, Mr. Trump wanted his visitors to see his most attractive employees, as Ms. Res learned.

We had a big meeting once. I grabbed one of the women in the office and sent her in to get lunch orders. Donald said, “Not her.” She didn’t look great. He got another woman to take the lunch orders. That was purely about looks. He wanted the people in that room to think that all the women who worked for him were beautiful.

–Ms. Res

Mr. Trump frequently sought assurances — at times from strangers — that the women in his life were beautiful. During the 1997 Miss Teen USA pageant, he sat in the audience as his teenage daughter, Ivanka, helped to host the event from onstage. He turned to Brook Antoinette Mahealani Lee, Miss Universe at the time, and asked for her opinion of his daughter’s body.

“ ‘Don’t you think my daughter’s hot? She’s hot, right?’ ” Ms. Lee recalled him saying. ‘I was like, ‘Really?’ That’s just weird. She was 16. That’s creepy.”

Ms. Brewer Lane, who dated Mr. Trump for several months in 1990 and early 1991, said it did not take long for him to solicit her view on the attractiveness of two of his previous romantic partners, Marla Maples and Ivana Trump.

He did ask me, on a scale of 1 to 10, what I thought of Marla. I thought that was very boyish of him. He asked me the same thing about Ivana. I said, obviously, she is your wife. A beautiful woman. What could you say but a 10? I am not going to judge your wife.

–Ms. Brewer Lane

Mr. Trump said he did not know Ms. Brewer Lane very well, despite dating her. “I wouldn’t have asked anybody about how they rate other women,” he said.

Kissing, and Telling Everyone

He liked to brag about his sexual prowess and his desirability as a date, no matter who was around.

Barbara J. Fife, a deputy mayor under David N. Dinkins, New York’s mayor in the early 1990s, was not especially close to Mr. Trump. But that did not stop him from telling her why he was in such a hurry one day as he sat in her office at City Hall.

“I have this great date tonight with a model for Victoria’s Secret,” Ms. Fife recalled him telling her.

“I saw it as immature, quite honestly,” she said.

At his office in Trump Tower, Mr. Trump seemed eager for his colleagues to hear about his new companion, Ms. Maples. When The New York Post feasted on her supposed satisfaction with him in bed, captured in the headline “Best Sex I’ve Ever Had,” Mr. Trump was unabashed, Ms. Res said.

He absolutely loved that. He waved it around the office. “Did you see this?” Everyone who worked there were kind of horrified. We all thought it made him look bad. He didn’t.

–Ms. Res

Mr. Trump denies boasting about the headline. He seems more bashful these days, saying he cannot recall how many women he has dated. “Not as many as people would think,” he said. “I’m not somebody that really loved the dating process.”

Women as Trusted Colleagues

To build his business, Mr. Trump turned to women for a simple reason: They worked hard — often harder than men, he told them.

When Mr. Trump hired Ms. Res to oversee the construction of Trump Tower, he invited her to his apartment on Fifth Avenue and explained that he wanted her to be his “Donna Trump” on the project, she said. Few women had reached such stature in the industry.

Photo

Ms. Res and Mr. Trump in 1989. Credit via Barbara A. Res
He said: “I know you’re a woman in a man’s world. And while men tend to be better than women, a good woman is better than 10 good men.” … He thought he was really complimenting me.

–Ms. Res

He entrusted several women in his company with enormous responsibility — once they had proven themselves worthy and loyal. Ms. Sunshine had little experience in real estate, but as a top campaign fund-raiser for Gov. Hugh Carey of New York, she had fulfilled a lifelong wish for Mr. Trump: She secured him a vanity license plate with his initials, DJT, which adorned his limousine for years.

It’s something he had wanted since his father bought him toy cars. By some gift of God, I was able to obtain it for him. He was beyond thrilled. And I became the woman in his life who could do no wrong. And he became the man in my life who was going to be my mentor.

–Louise Sunshine, former Trump executive

Ms. Sunshine worked for Mr. Trump for 15 years, becoming a major New York real estate figure in her own right. Ms. Res remained at the company for 12 years, left after a disagreement over a project and then returned as a consultant for six more years. Both expressed gratitude for the chances Mr. Trump had taken on them.

In a rough-and-tumble industry thoroughly dominated by men, Mr. Trump’s office stood out for its diversity, recalled Alan Lapidus, an influential architect who designed the Trump Plaza casino in Atlantic City.

He is a lot more complicated than the cartoon character. The top people in his company were women, like Barbara Res. For any company to hire a woman as chief of construction was actually startling. I don’t know of a single other developer who had a woman in that position. The respect for women was always there. That’s why, in spite of the comments he makes now — and God knows why he says these things — when he was building his empire, the backbone was women.

–Alan Lapidus, architect

Dismissive Nicknames

To women who had climbed to positions of power outside his company, Mr. Trump’s behavior could feel like a jarring throwback.

Alair A. Townsend was for a time the highest-ranking woman inside New York’s City Hall during the Koch administration, with the title of deputy mayor for economic development. But when Mr. Trump called her, she said, her position seemed less relevant to him than her gender.

He was dismissive. It was always, “Hon,” “Dear.” Things he wouldn’t have said to a man. It was designed to make you feel small. And he did that repeatedly.

–Alair A. Townsend, former deputy mayor

It was an unthinking habit when he interacted with women, colleagues said. “At Trump Tower,” said Ms. Res, his longtime colleague, “he called me Honey Bunch.”

Wife and Partner, and Regret

No single figure better encapsulated the paradoxes of Mr. Trump’s treatment of women in the workplace than his first wife, Ivana.

He entrusted her with major pieces of a corporate empire and gave her the titles to match. She was the president of Trump’s Castle, a major casino in Atlantic City, and the Plaza Hotel, the storied complex on Central Park South in Manhattan. “She ran that hotel,” Ms. Res said. “And she ran it well.”

Photo

Ivana Trump with Mr. Trump. Credit Bob Sacha/Corbis, via Getty Images
But he compensated her as a spouse, not a high-level employee, paying her an annual salary of $1 for the Trump’s Castle job, according to her tax documents. And he grew to resent her outsize role. By the end of their marriage, Mr. Trump wrote in his 1997 book, “The Art of the Comeback,” he regretted having allowed her to run his businesses.

My big mistake with Ivana was taking her out of the role of wife and allowing her to run one of my casinos in Atlantic City, then the Plaza Hotel. The problem was, work was all she wanted to talk about. When I got home at night, rather than talking about the softer subjects of life, she wanted to tell me how well the Plaza was doing, or what a great day the casino had.

I will never again give a wife responsibility within my business.

–Donald J. Trump, presumptive Republican nominee

He seems to have kept his word. His current wife, Melania, has marketed her own lines of beauty products and jewelry. But Mr. Trump remains mostly uninvolved in her work. After calling it “very successful,” he struggled to describe it.

“What is it on television with the sales?” he asked. “What do they call that? Not Home Shopping, the other one.”

Accusations and Denials

Once his first marriage started to collapse, Mr. Trump faced his most serious allegations of aggression toward women.

When “Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump,” by the journalist Harry Hurt III, was released in 1993, it included a description of a night in which Mr. Trump was said to have raped Ivana in a fit of rage. It also included a statement from Ivana that Mr. Trump’s lawyers insisted be placed in the front of the book. In the statement, she described an occasion of “marital relations” during which “I felt violated, as the love and tenderness, which he normally exhibited toward me, was absent.”

“During a deposition given by me in connection with my matrimonial case, I stated that my husband had raped me,” the statement said. “I referred to this as a ‘rape,’ but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense.”

Mr. Trump denied raping Ivana, and she did not respond to a request for comment. After the allegation re-emerged in the news media last year, Ivana said in a statement, “The story is totally without merit.”

In the early 1990s, Jill Harth and her boyfriend at the time, George Houraney, worked with Mr. Trump on a beauty pageant in Atlantic City, and later accused Mr. Trump of inappropriate behavior toward Ms. Harth during their business dealings. In a 1996 deposition, Ms. Harth described their initial meeting with Mr. Trump at Trump Tower.

Donald Trump stared at me throughout that meeting. He stared at me even while George was giving his presentation. … In the middle of it he says to George, “Are you sleeping with her?” Meaning me. And George looked a little shocked and he said, “Well, yeah.” And he goes, “Well, for the weekend or what?”

–Jill Harth, former pageant promoter

Mr. Houraney said in a recent interview that he was shocked by Mr. Trump’s response after he made clear that he and Ms. Harth were monogamous.

“He said: ‘Well, there’s always a first time. I am going after her,’ ” Mr. Houraney recalled, adding: “I thought the man was joking. I laughed. He said, ‘I am serious.’ ”

By the time the three of them were having dinner at the Oak Room of the Plaza Hotel the next night, Mr. Trump’s advances had turned physical, Ms. Harth said in the deposition.

“Basically he name-dropped throughout that dinner, when he wasn’t groping me under the table,” she testified. “Let me just say, this was a very traumatic thing working for him.”

Ms. Harth, who declined to comment, gave the deposition in connection with a lawsuit that alleged Mr. Trump had failed to meet his obligations in a business partnership. Mr. Trump settled that case but denied wrongdoing. Ms. Harth withdrew her own lawsuit against Mr. Trump alleging unwanted advances, but she has stood by her original claims.

Mr. Trump said it was Ms. Harth who had pursued him, and his office shared email messages in which Ms. Harth, over the past year, thanked Mr. Trump for helping her personally and professionally and expressed support for his presidential candidacy.

Defending His Record

Mr. Trump says the world misunderstands his relationship with women.

He sees himself as a promoter of women — a man whose business deals, like the purchase of the struggling Miss Universe pageant, have given them untold opportunities for employment and advancement. “Hundreds and hundreds of women, thousands of women, are the better for it,” he said.

He has groomed his daughter, Ivanka, to run his company. And as a chief executive, he said, he admires women for a work ethic that can exceed that of the men around them. Mr. Trump recalled a telling exchange with a female worker.

I’ve said, “Why don’t you go home and take it easy now, just go relax.” “No, Mr. Trump, I have to finish this job.” And I said, “Boy, you really are a worker.” And it would just seem that there was something, that they want to really prove something, which is wonderful.

–Mr. Trump

Several women who have held positions of power within the Trump Organization in recent years said they had never known Mr. Trump to objectify women or treat them with disrespect.

“I think there are mischaracterizations about him,” said Jill Martin, a vice president and assistant counsel at the company. Ms. Martin said Mr. Trump had enthusiastically supported her decision to have two children over the past five years, even when it meant working from home and scaling back on business travel.

“That’s hard with women lawyers,” she said. “For me, he’s made it a situation where I can really excel at my job and still devote the time necessary for my family.”

After competing in the 2009 Miss USA pageant, Laura Kirilova Chukanov, a Bulgarian immigrant who lived in Utah, met with Mr. Trump in his New York office and explained that she wanted to make a documentary about her home country. Mr. Trump encouraged the project and followed through on a promise to put her in touch with his production company.

“He genuinely wanted to know what I wanted to do with my life and how he could help,” Ms. Chukanov said.

A Damaging Critique

But when Mr. Trump lost confidence in women, he could inflict lasting damage on their lives.

After Alicia Machado won the 1996 Miss Universe title, something very human happened: She gained weight. Mr. Trump did not keep his critique of her changing body quiet — he publicly shamed her, she said.

Continue reading the main story

Photo

Alicia Machado, a former Miss Universe.
Credit Emily Berl for The New York Times
I told the president of Miss Universe, a very sweet woman, I said I need some time to recuperate, to rest, to exercise, to eat right. I asked them to bring me a doctor to help me — to have a special diet and get exercise, and they said yes. They took me to New York, installed me in a hotel. The next day, they took me to the gym, and I’m exposed to 90 media outlets. Donald Trump was there. I had no idea that would happen.

I was about to cry in that moment with all the cameras there. I said, “I don’t want to do this, Mr. Trump.” He said, “I don’t care.”

–Alicia Machado, 1996 Miss Universe

Mr. Trump said he had pushed her to lose weight. “To that, I will plead guilty,” he said, expressing no regret for his tactics.

But the humiliation, Ms. Machado said, was unbearable. “After that episode, I was sick, anorexia and bulimia for five years,” she said. “Over the past 20 years, I’ve gone to a lot of psychologists to combat this.”

Deborah Acosta and Nicholas Casey contributed reporting, and Kitty Bennett contributed research.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/us/politics/donald-trump-women.html?_r=0

 

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 675-682

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 DownloadShows 599-607

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or DownloadShows 590-598

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or DownloadShows 585- 589

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or DownloadShows 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 01-09

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Pronk Pops Show 678, May 12, 2016, Story 1: Republican Establishment House Speaker Paul Ryan Meets Mr. Outsider — Donald J. Trump — Next President of The United States — Videos

Posted on May 12, 2016. Filed under: 2016 Presidential Campaign, 2016 Presidential Candidates, American History, Banking System, Blogroll, Breaking News, Budgetary Policy, Communications, Congress, Constitutional Law, Corruption, Countries, Defense Spending, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Economics, Education, Empires, Employment, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Free Trade, Government, Government Spending, History, House of Representatives, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Independence, Investments, Labor Economics, Law, Legal Immigration, Media, Medicare, Monetary Policy, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Progressives, Radio, Senate, Social Security, Tax Policy, Taxes, Trade Policy, Unemployment, United States of America, War, Wealth, Welfare Spending, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 678: May 12, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 677: May 11, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 676: May 10, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 675: May 9, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 674: May 6, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 673: May 5, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 672: May 4, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 671: May 3, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 670: May 2, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 669: April 29, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 668: April 28, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 667: April 27, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 666: April 26, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 665: April 25, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 664: April 24, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 663: April 21, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 662: April 20, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 661: April 19, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 660: April 18, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 659: April 15, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 658: April 14, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 657: April 13, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 656: April 12, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 655: April 11, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 654: April 8, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 653: April 7, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 652: April 6, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 651: April 4, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 650: April 1, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 649: March 31, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 648: March 30, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 647: March 29, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 646: March 28, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 645: March 24, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 644: March 23, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 643: March 22, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 642: March 21, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 641: March 11, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 640: March 10, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 639: March 9, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 638: March 8, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 637: March 7, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 636: March 4, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 635: March 3, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 634: March 2, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 633: March 1, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 632: February 29, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 631: February 25, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 630: February 24, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 629: February 22, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 628: February 19, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 627: February 18, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 626: February 17, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 625: February 16, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 624: February 15, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 623: February 12, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 622: February 11, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 621: February 10, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 620: February 9, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 619: February 8, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 618: February 5, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 617: February 4, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 616: February 3, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 615: February 1, 2016

Story 1: Republican Establishment House Speaker Paul Ryan Meets Mr. Outsider — Donald J. Trump — Next President of The United States — Videos

Copyright www.flags.net/UNST.htm Republican Convention
Presidential Nominating Process
Debate –  Fox – Cleveland, Ohio: Thursday 6 August 2015
Debate – CNN – Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, Simi Valley, California: Wednesday 16 September 2015
Debate – CNBC – Boulder, Colorado: Wednesday 28 October 2015
Debate – Fox Business News – Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Tuesday 10 November 2015
Debate – CNN – Las Vegas, Nevada: Tuesday 15 December 2015
Debate – Fox Business Channel, Charleston, South Carolina: Thursday 14 January 2016
Debate – Fox – Iowa: Thursday 28 January 2016
Debate – CBS – South Carolina: February 2016 (presumably)
Debate – NBC/Telemundo – Texas: Friday 26 February 2016
Debate – CNN – TBD: March 2016 (presumably)
Debate – Salt Lake City, Utah (announced 20 February 2016): Monday 21 March 2016
41st Republican National Convention: Monday 18 July – Thursday 21 July 2016
Republicans
Candidate Popular
Vote
Delegate Votes
Soft
Pledged
Soft
Unpledged
Soft
Total
Hard Total
Trump, Donald John, Sr. 10,999,775  40.65% 1,091  46.17% 52  47.71% 1,143  46.24% 1,084  43.85%
Cruz, Rafael Edward “Ted” 7,383,017  27.28% 550  23.28% 20  18.35% 570  23.06% 546  22.09%
Kasich, John Richard 3,802,163  14.05% 154   6.52% 3   2.75% 157   6.35% 154   6.23%
Rubio, Marco A. 3,508,256  12.96% 168   7.11%   168   6.80% 173   7.00%
Carson, Benjamin Solomon “Ben”, Sr. 746,677   2.76% 7   0.30%   7   0.28% 9   0.36%
Bush, John Ellis “Jeb” 279,352   1.03% 4   0.17%   4   0.16% 4   0.16%
Uncommitted 72,648   0.27% 11   0.47% 15  13.76% 26   1.05% 121   4.89%
Paul, Randal H. “Rand” 66,711   0.25% 1   0.04%   1   0.04% 1   0.04%
Christie, Christopher James “Chris” 57,590   0.21%        
Huckabee, Michael Dale “Mike” 51,367   0.19% 1   0.04%   1   0.04% 1   0.04%
Fiorina, Carleton Sneed “Carly” 39,006   0.14% 1   0.04%   1   0.04% 1   0.04%
Santorum, Richard John “Rick” 16,598   0.06%        
No Preference 9,299   0.03%        
(others) 6,368   0.02%        
Graham, Lindsey Olin 5,663   0.02%        
Gray, Elizabeth 5,449   0.02%        
Others 3,911   0.01%        
Gilmore, James Stuart “Jim”, III 2,673   0.01%        
Pataki, George E. 2,036   0.01%        
Scattering 1,381   0.01%        
Cook, Timothy “Tim” 517   0.00%        
Jindal, Piyush “Bobby” 222   0.00%        
Hall, David Eames 204   0.00%        
Martin, Andy 202   0.00%        
Spoiled ballots 137   0.00%        
Witz, Richard P.H. 104   0.00%        
Lynch, James P. “Jim”, Sr. 100   0.00%        
Messina, Peter 79   0.00%        
Cullison, Brooks Andrews 56   0.00%        
Lynch, Frank 47   0.00%        
Robinson, Joe 44   0.00%        
Williams, Victor 39   0.00%        
Comley, Stephen Bradley, Sr. 32   0.00%        
Prag, Chomi