Paul's World
Copyright 2015 - 2020 by Paul Baumgartner
You will find links to latest stories I find interesting on Home page ticker and post pages below the ticker. Click on the picture or intentional link to get to the original story. You will find custom articles in the menu bar and submenu above.
How Hillary Would Throw Minorities Under The Bus
by Paul Baumgartner, October 23, 2016
​
One reason we can say that Hillary would throw America’s classic minorities under the bus is because of the results of policies and actions affecting minorities in the past. Hillary supported the Welfare Reform Bill of 1996, which required single mothers to find work without providing transportation or childcare, and which in effect doubled the number of families earning less than $2 a day [1]. Hillary’s support of this bill was very shortsighted in how it would affect so many minority families.
Hillary also unequivocally supported the NAFTA Free Trade Agreement at the time it was passed and for many years afterwards [2]. NAFTA resulted in thousands of factories disappearing from American cities, where America’s minorities were working. These jobs went to other countries. Again, Hillary was very shortsighted as to how this would affect American’s minorities.
More recently, we can see how Hillary treated minorities in the involvement of the Clinton Foundation with Haiti in times of crisis. Billions of dollars that the Clinton Foundation collected to help Haitians after the earthquake of 2010, never reached the Haitians [3]. The Clinton Foundation took Billions of dollars from other charities, donors, foreign governments, and even the United States Government. Then they funneled this money to a consulting firm they created or other companies that donated to the Clinton Foundation, resulting in only a small portion of the monies being used for actual aid [4]. The shelters that the Clinton Foundation built for the Haitians were already knowingly unsafe [5]. The Clinton Foundation evicted 366 farmers to build an industrial complex that now does nothing but store goods made in other countries for redistribution [6]. Hillary Clinton’s brother, Tony Rodham, landed a lucrative and historically rare Haitian “gold exploitation permit,” while Clinton Foundation donors, including Digicel mobile phone company founder Denis O’Brien, were winning multi-million dollar contracts that would siphon massive profits from the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere [7][8]. Not only was Hillary shortsighted in these actions, but she was literally abusing the Haitians for personal profit.
Because of the Haitian scandal, as well as many other scandals, many news agencies have pleaded for the Clintons to shut down the Clinton Foundation [9] [10] [11] [12]. But the Clinton Foundation will continue. What Hillary says she plans to do with the Foundation is that Bill and Hillary will step down from the board, and let Chelsea still run it, and they will no longer accept donations from foreign countries [13]. With Bill & Hillary off the board, then it would be completely legal for all 3 Clintons to receive a salary from the Foundation. Bill would still be able to collect enormous fees for speaking engagements. Bill Clinton himself has said, “There is nothing wrong with what we’re doing [14].”
If you believe everything Bill Clinton says, I have a bridge to sell you. Here is what will stay the same:
-
Income from Foundation donors. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/aug/14/paul-manafort/paul-manafort-says-clintons-tax-returns-show-incom/
-
Business with Criminals. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/419791/clinton-foundation-reeks-crooks-thieves-and-hoods-deroy-murdock
-
Foreign governments making donations to Clinton Foundation, Clinton speeches, Clinton Hosted events, or Clinton campaigns. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/foreign-governments-gave-millions-to-foundation-while-clinton-was-at-state-dept/2015/02/25/31937c1e-bc3f-11e4-8668-4e7ba8439ca6_story.html
-
Blur between duties of Clinton Foundation and Clinton held government position. http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-new-abedin-emails-reveal-top-clinton-foundation-executive-doug-band-sought-diplomatic-passport-clinton-state-department/
-
Foundation will still be used as a way for donors to get access to Hillary. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/24/bias-alert-new-york-times-finds-latest-clinton-foundation-bombshell-unfit-to-print.html
-
People will be hired to work full time for Clinton Foundation & Hillary’s government at the same time.
-
Cash will flow to Foundation when Hillary makes foreign deals. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fr.search.yahoo.com%2FRV%3D1%2FRE%3D1474486670%2FRB%3D%2FRO%3D8%2FRU%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2015%2F04%2F24%2Fus%2Fcash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html%2FRS%3D%5EADAHMvx_PMUR.CxzLXX1u9IhnpdWZA-
-
More cash flow from exploitative deals. https://youtu.be/qOZ7qmKzwcc
-
The Foundation will continue to accept money from terrorists. http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/08/28/trump-campaign-clinton-foundation-shut-hezbollah/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
-
Donations, speeches and consulting jobs with shadowy corporations with invisible tentacles. http://www.judicialwatch.org/bulletins/teneo-the-clinton-machine/
-
Multimillion dollar stints for hosting special events. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/20/abedin-implicated-clinton-in-foundation-trade-off-with-morocco-amid-12-million-commitment.html
-
More money going to fancy conferences than to direct aid. http://nypost.com/2015/04/26/charity-watchdog-clinton-foundation-a-slush-fund/
-
Large amount of funds go to consulting firms to perform charitable services that also hire the Clintons at huge salaries, like Teneo. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/teneo-final-221807
If she keeps her promises like she did when she was Secretary of State, we can be certain that Hillary will NOT keep her promises this time. Hillary promised to not have anything to do with the Foundation as she worked as Secretary of State [15]. Yet, right after making this promise, Hillary hired Huma Abedin to work for both the Foundation and the State Department [16] [17]. If she won’t keep her promises to superior government officials, do you really think she will keep her promises to you?
Secondly, Hillary will throw America’s classic minorities under the bus because she will show preference to illegal immigrants and refugees. Hillary would like to take in more Syrian refugees. She would like to take in another 65,000 Syrian Refugees each year [18]. This would cost an additional $400 Billion just in her first term [19]. This leaves fewer funds available for helping our classic minorities.
Furthermore, the Clintons support the idea of settling Syrian refugees in our big cities where classic minorities live [20]. There is a 2,400% likelier chance that Syrian refugees will commit an act of terrorism than domestic terrorism [21]. So, Hillary is not concerned about the danger that she would put our classic minority communities in by this agenda [24].
Hillary is also committed to increase immigration and is not concerned about illegal immigrants [22]. Now this is very interesting because if you are an immigrant, and you register, you can get full welfare benefits, while unregistered immigrants (illegal immigrants) can only get food stamps and healthcare. So, who would really want to be an illegal immigrant unless they are hiding something like a crime career? Hillary will even continue Obama’s unconstitutional and illegal executive orders to provide sanctuary to illegal immigrants [23]. Illegal Immigrants have a higher rate of incarceration for violent crimes at 11.6% compared to the general population rate of 2.5% as deducted from statistics provided by the Government Accountability Office [25]. These illegal aliens typically live in inner city, lower income, minority neighborhoods. So, a Hillary presidency would make things less safe primarily for America’s classic minorities.
Thirdly, Hillary is a solid proponent of Free Trade, and this would make employment even more scant for America’s minorities. November 5, 2012, Hillary Clinton said, "This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field. And when negotiated, this agreement will cover 40 percent of the world's total trade and build in strong protections for workers and the environment [26]." In her second memoir, Hard Choices, released in 2014, Clinton lauded the deal, saying it "would link markets throughout Asia and the Americas, lowering trade barriers while raising standards on labor, the environment, and intellectual property." She even said it was "important for American workers, who would benefit from competing on a more level playing field [27]." This is in accord with her general history of supporting Free Trade Agreements. She was in support of NAFTA when Bill Clinton signed it. As first lady, in 1996, Clinton trumpeted NAFTA as "proving its worth." Two years later, she went to Davos, Switzerland, where she spoke at the World Economic Forum and thanked businesses for lobbying for the agreement. She also criticized them for not making a stronger push to give her husband fast-track authority to negotiate trade deals and limit congressional power to alter those deals [28].
However, at times, Hillary Clinton’s support for Free Trade wavers. As Clinton campaigned for a U.S. Senate seat in New York, where upstate manufacturing jobs had been lost, she backed away from strong support for NAFTA. She called it "flawed," adding that it needed to be fixed and noting, "[W]e didn't get everything we should have got out of it [29]."
Then, once she was a Senator, she voted in favor of free trade agreements with Singapore, Chile, Australia, Morocco and Oman. She also voiced support for deals with Jordan and Peru. But she also voted against the Central American Free Trade Agreement, or CAFTA [30].
When running for president in 2007 and 2008, she spoke strongly against potential agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea. Her positions on Colombia and South Korea changed, however, when she became secretary of state under President Obama, who ironically ran to Clinton's left in 2008 on trade [31].
Then, as I mentioned four paragraphs ago, Hillary was solidly in favor of Free Trade and called it the “Gold Standard.” Yet, she reneged on this stance once again, once she was campaigning again. "As of today, I am not in favor of what I have learned about it," she said in an Oct. 8 interview with PBS Newshour’s Judy Woodruff, adding, "I don’t believe it’s going to meet the high bar I have set [32]."
Do you notice the pattern? When she is campaigning, she is against Free Trade, otherwise she is all for it and a major proponent of it. What should we expect if she is elected to office? Terry McAuliffe signaled in an interview with Politico that Clinton would reverse course on TPP after the campaign. “Once the election’s over, and we sit down on trade, people understand a couple things we want to fix on it but going forward we got to build a global economy,” he said. “Yes,” he added when pressed if she would ultimately support it. “Listen, she was in support of it. There were specific things in it she wants fixed [33].” You can fully expect that Hillary Clinton will push for the passing of TPP if she is elected President of the United States.
In conclusion, the presidency of Hillary Clinton will serve as a triple threat to America’s minorities. First, she will be insensitive to the outcomes of Bills passed and actions that she is involved in and the outcomes to be expected for minorities. Second, she is a proponent of open borders, which would bring more terrorists and criminals in and near minority communities. Third, she is a proponent of Free Trade, which will mean fewer jobs, especially for manufacturing and especially for America’s minorities.
Footnotes