DOH! Did You Know There’s a Treaty Between the USA & Ukraine Regarding Cooperation For Prosecuting Crimes?
My goodness. It was passed when Joe Biden was a member of the U.S. Senate and then signed by then-President Bill Clinton.
A comprehensive treaty agreement that allows cooperation between both the United States and Ukraine in the investigation and prosecution of crimes.
It appears President Trump was following the law to the letter when it comes to unearthing the long-standing corruption that has swirled in Ukraine and allegedly involves powerful Democrats like Joe Biden and others.
“To the Senate of the United States: With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998. I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, an exchange of notes which was signed on September 30, 1999, which provides for its provisional application, as well as the report of the Department of State with respect to the Treaty. The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States in order to counter criminal activities more effectively. The Treaty should be an effective tool to assist in the prosecution of a wide variety of crimes, including drug trafficking offenses. The Treaty is self-executing. It provides for a broad range of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance available under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or statements of persons; providing documents, records, and articles of evidence; serving documents; locating or identifying persons; transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to restraint, confiscation, forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection of fines; and any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the requested state. I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to ratification.”WILLIAM J. CLINTON.
by Tyler Durden Mon, 09/23/2019 – 10:05
Rudy Giuliani leveled serious new claims at the Bidens in a series of Monday morning tweets. Chief among them is a claim that $3 million was laundered to former Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, via a “Ukraine-Latvia-Cyprus-US” route – a revelation he claims was “kept from you by Swamp Media.” by Tyler Durden Mon, 09/23/2019 – 10:05
Trump’s personal attorney then mentioned China – where journalist Peter Schweizer reported Joe and Hunter Biden flew in 2013 on Air Force Two. Two weeks later, Hunter’s firm inked a private equity deal for $1 billion with a subsidiary of the Chinese government’s Bank of China, which expanded to $1.5 billion, according to an article by Schweizer’s in the New York Post.
Giuliani then went on to tweet that the Bidens lied about not discussing Hunter’s overseas business.
On Saturday, Joe Biden said he “never” spoke with Hunter about the Ukrainian energy company that Hunter sat on the board of while being paid $50,000 per month. As you’re doubtless aware by now, the elder Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in US loan guarantees from Ukraine if they didn’t fire the investigator probing the company, Burisma.
Hunter, however,admitted in July that the two did speak about his Ukraine business “just once,” telling the New Yorker “Dad said, ‘I hope you know what you are doing,’ and I said, ‘I do’“
Rudy then lashed out at the Democratic party, which he said would “own” Biden’s scandals if hey don’t “call for investigation of Bidens’ millions from Ukraine and billions from China.”
Here’s what we know about Hunter’s dealings in China based on Schweizer’s reporting via our May report:
- Hunter Biden and his partners created several LLCs involved in multibillion-dollar private equity deals with Chinese government-owned entities.
- The primary operation was Rosemont Seneca Partners – an investment firm founded in 2009 and controlled by Hunter Biden, John Kerry’s stepson Chris Heinz, and Heniz’s longtime associate Devon Archer. The trio began making deals “through a series of overlapping entities” under Rosemont.
- In less than a year, Hunter Biden and Archer met with top Chinese officials in China, and partnered with the Thornton Group – a Massachusetts-based consultancy headed by James Bulger –
sonnephew of famed mob hitman James “Whitey” Bulger (h/t @Guerrilla_Magoo for the correction).
- According to the Thornton Group’s Chinese-language website, Chinese executives “extended their warm welcome” to the “Thornton Group, with its US partner Rosemont Seneca chairman Hunter Biden (second son of the now Vice President Joe Biden.”
- Officially, the China meets were to “explore the possibility of commercial cooperation and opportunity,” however details of the meeting were not published to the English-language version of the website.
- “The timing of this meeting was also notable. It occurred just hours before Hunter Biden’s father, the vice president, met with Chinese President Hu Jintao in Washington as part of the Nuclear Security Summit,” according to Schweizer.
- Perhaps most damning in terms of timing and optics, just twelve days after Hunter and Joe Biden flew on Air Force Two to Beijing, Hunter’s company signed a “historic deal with the Bank of China,” described by Schweizer as “the state-owned financial behemoth often used as a tool of the Chinese government.” To accommodate the deal, the Bank of China created a unique type of investment fund called Bohai Harvest RST (BHR). According to BHR, Rosemont Seneca Partners is a founding partner.
It was an unprecedented arrangement: the government of one of America’s fiercest competitors going into business with the son of one of America’s most powerful decisionmakers.
Chris Heinz claims neither he nor Rosemont Seneca Partners, the firm he had part ownership of, had any role in the deal with Bohai Harvest. Nonetheless, Biden, Archer and the Rosemont name became increasingly involved with China. Archer became the vice chairman of Bohai Harvest, helping oversee some of the fund’s investments. –New York Post
And while Hunter Biden had “no experience in China, and little in private equity,” the Chinese government for some reason thought it would be a great idea to give his firm business opportunities instead of established global banks such as Morgan Stanley or Goldman Sachs.
Also in December 2014, a Chinese state-backed conglomerate called Gemini Investments Limited was negotiating and sealing deals with Hunter Biden’s Rosemont on several fronts. That month, it made a $34 million investment into a fund managed by Rosemont.
The following August, Rosemont Realty, another sister company of Rosemont Seneca, announced that Gemini Investments was buying a 75 percent stake in the company. The terms of the deal included a $3 billion commitment from the Chinese, who were eager to purchase new US properties. Shortly after the sale, Rosemont Realty was rechristened Gemini Rosemont.
Chinese executives lauded the deal. –New York Post
“Rosemont, with its comprehensive real-estate platform and superior performance history, was precisely the investment opportunity Gemini Investments was looking for in order to invest in the US real estate market,” said Li Ming, chairman of Sino-Ocean Land Holdings Limited and Gemini Investments. “We look forward to a strong and successful partnership.“
Three years later,a crack pipe, two DC driver’s licenses and other paraphenelia would be found in a rental car Hunter Biden returned to an Arizona Hertz location in the middle of the night.
The morning after the car was dropped off, a phone number belonging to a renowned local “Colon Hydrotherapist” called the Hertz. The caller identified himself as “Joseph McGee,” who told the employees that the keys were located in the gas cap as opposed to the drop box.
Amazing how so many countries would scramble to do business with Hunter – a guy with virtually no experience who was discharged from the Navy after testing positive for cocaine – who just happened to be the Vice President’s son.
January 11, 2013
Dear President Obama:
Both Attorney General Eric Holder and Vice President Joe Biden have said you are weighing using “executive action” to implement gun registration and licensing beyond even the ban on semi-automatic firearms proposed by Senator Dianne Feinstein and others.
When the National Firearms Act passed in 1934, Congress still understood that it didn’t have the power under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution to regulate Title II weapons, so it imposed a tax – an exorbitant tax, perhaps, but still a tax. Since then, however, overbroad interpretations of its power to regulate “interstate commerce” have become the norm, and Congress now feels free to legislate gun laws.
IT’S CALLED ‘USURPATION OF POWER,’ MR. PRESIDENT
“usurpation: …the unlawful or violent seizure of a throne, power, etc.” – Webster’s Dictionary
Apparently, however, even congressional usurpation of power is no longer sufficient for you: What you now threaten violates Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution. Since you seem to have forgotten it, here it is:
“All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.”
Is your usurpation of power by circumventing the legislative process a bid to turn our Republic into an autocracy? What will be your next Executive Order? Will it give you another four – or perhaps forty – years in the White House?
IT’S NOT ABOUT GUNS, IT’S ABOUT FREEDOM
Do you expect the American people to take so lightly this assault on their freedom?
They won’t, Mr. President. Millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens will refuse to comply, and by so doing become criminals. But I suspect you know that, don’t you? Maybe that is exactly what you want because, as George Orwell noted in his book “1984,” government has no control over the law-abiding; it can only control people who violate existing law, such as it may be.
And what happens next, Mr. President? Do S.W.A.T. teams break into the homes of our citizens at night to confiscate arms and arrest offenders? Make no mistake: That is what enforcing this law will require.
And what happens when, inevitably, some resist? Do you honestly believe people will go peacefully into bondage? How many will die as the direct result of your actions?
There is no need to send the Secret Service to my door, Mr. President (although I suspect you might anyway). I am not advocating violence; I am merely saying what others are afraid to.
The real question, Mr. President, is whether you so hunger for power that you are willing to foment what might be the next American Revolution. Will that be your enduring legacy?
At the Battle of Thermopylae, King Leonidus I, facing demands by the numerically superior Persian army for the Spartans to surrender their arms, responded with what is now expressed as “Molon labe.”
It means, “Come and get them.”
Armatissimi e liberissimi,
F. Paul Valone II
President, Grass Roots North Carolina
Executive Director, Rights Watch International
- Biden: Obama Prepared to Use Executive Order on Gun Control (gds44.wordpress.com)
- Guns And Obama: The Stand (personalliberty.com)
- Assault on the Second Amendment (papundits.wordpress.com)
May 18, 2012 11:52 am BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
The New York Times reports today on the rise of China’s “princelings,” the children of the Communist Party’s former and current leadership, who have taken control over many of that country’s most profitable businesses.
What the New York Times does not reveal is that Katzenberg is the largest donor to President Obama’s Super PAC Priorities USA at $2 million and a major bundler to the Obama campaign, having raised more than $500,000 for the President’s reelection campaign.
Also not revealed by the New York Times, Katzenberg and his studio are currently under SEC investigation for bribing Chinese officials in order to obtain access to the Chinese market.
The Dreamworks deal has raised questions about pay for play on the American side as well. The nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation notes that Katzenberg’s deal was made possible with help from the Obama administration, which arranged a meeting for Katzenberg with Chinese Vice President and heir apparent Xi Jingping after his White House visit in February. Xi traveled from the White House to Los Angeles to sign the deal with the major Obama donor.
The Sunlight Foundation asks if “Katzenberg’s support for Obama fast-track[ed his] movie deal with China?” But Dreamworks would not respond to on-the-record questions from the good government watchdog group.
Vice President Biden also personally engaged in the negotiations with the Chinese government in advance of Katzenberg’s deal that effectively raised the number of U.S. films that could be released in the Chinese market each year—an agreement that made the Katzenberg deal significantly more valuable.
Earlier this month, President Obama embraced Katzenberg just days after the SEC announced its investigation. “I want to thank Jeffrey (Katzenberg) not just for this evening, but for his tenacious support and advocacy since we started back in 2007. He has consistently been there for me, through thick and through thin,” Obama said.
“The only person I don’t have to remind [of how difficult the 2008 campaign was] is Jeffrey because he was there, through all the ups and downs, and occasionally he would call, and he would say, ‘Barack, I don’t think that things are working the way they’re supposed to.’”
- Barry-O’s Huge Hollywood Donors Go Chinese (dewgeneral.wordpress.com)
- ‘Starmageddon:’ Angelenos dump on $15 million Obama/Clooney party (twitchy.com)
- Katzenberg to the rescue for Obama Super PAC (laobserved.com)
This Tuesday, when President Obama delivers his State of the Union Address, we can count on it to be filled with the same platitudes, anecdotes, false promises, cooked stats and tenuous connection with reality we find in everything the man does. It will be a laundry list of progressive fantasy, couched in populist rhetoric and designed to make middle-class Americans think he has something more than the zero connection and concern for them he has.
President Obama doesn’t give a damn about the middle class, jobs, the economy or much of anything that distracts from his progressive agenda. But what do you expect from someone who shows such contempt for the nation’s pastime as to wear “mom jeans” when throwing out the first pitch at the All-Star game?
I’m kidding about “mom jeans,” of course, though only mostly. But about the contempt…not at all.
Last week President Obama went to Disney World – returning to his home country of Fantasy Land to deliver a speech about the need to boost tourism. Tourism is hurting, there’s no doubt about that. But taking a vacation is hardly a priority when you’re unemployed, and for the unemployed, Mr. Obama smacked them across the face with a dead fish.
The administration announced he would block the Keystone XL pipeline, a plan to move oil from Canada to refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast. The green left hates it because…well, it’s real energy rather than the “green” energy racket they love to milk for government subsidies. If it’s good for humans, you can count on these people to oppose it unless they’re lining their pockets with tax dollars or preparing to profit from forced customer base through regulation.
The pipeline would have meant jobs, good jobs, lots of them … but it seems, as Vice-President Joe Biden so artfully put it, that three-letter word that is President Obama’s No.1 priority – J-O-B-S – isn’t as much a priority as pleasing the cronies he desperately needs for his reelection.
How many jobs? Conservatives say a lot; progressives say not so many. I’m no engineer, but trenches from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico don’t dig themselves, and that pipe won’t magically appear once it’s dug – nor will it maintain itself. So, more than 100 but less than the millions who have lost jobs since President Obama took office. But creating some jobs beats creating no jobs, which is what President Obama chose when he took the side of his “green” elite friends against normal American workers.
By Ed Lasky
Barack Obama will give yet another major “jobs” speech this week. Ho-hum. For all the ballyhoo, he has been giving these for years. Most of America will tune out and instead look forward to his speech being over so they can celebrate something consequential: the start of NFL Football.
Obama has become tiresome. He is over-exposed. He has overstayed his welcome. We can hear the clichés that will be laced through his speech even before he speaks — the opposite of an echo. The promises will be there — what else can he sell? Certainly not his record on the economy.
He has always been a snake oil salesman; such people always tempt the needy with promises of great things to come. So we will once more hear him tout his policies as creating legions of new “green jobs” while making America the world leader in green energy. We have heard it before. He must either think we are stuck on stupid or he is the one stuck on stupid. This policy has clearly been one giant Green Jobs Con Job.
Those green jobs we have been promised have been a mirage. They are often temporary in nature and come at an extraordinary high price. Loan guarantees, mandates, feed-in tariffs, outright gifts of taxpayer money and other assorted goodies from the government have gone to bolster the prospects of profiteers and not the paychecks of workers. Often the money eventually flows to China to buy products (solar panels, wind turbines, rare earth minerals). The billions for green energy buried in the stimulus bill and the budget of the Department of Energy have been a stimulus all right: to China. But not only have the Chinese benefitted.
Obama’s spending has also enriched various venture capitalist supporters in Silicon Valley and other enclaves where Barack Obama is still popular. The billions that have flowed out of Washington (that is, from us) have brightened the prospects for such Green Entrepreneurs as Al Gore, the political prospects of the Biden family in Delaware (the electric car company Fisker Automotive got hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars from Uncles Barack and Joe Biden to open a factory in Delaware of all places — despite the fact that most new car factories now are located in right-to-work states; but the Biden political dynasty needs all the help it can get back home).
The billions tucked away here and there in Obama’s trillion dollar budgets serve as a slush fund to enrich people under the Democrats’ “friends and family program” (such as the Carnahan political dynasty in Missouri, enriched by stimulus money poured into a wind farm owned by a prominent member of that family; and the Kanjorksi clan in Pennsylvania — the nephew of then Congressman Paul Kanjorski worked for companies, including a Spanish solar company, that received hundreds of millions of dollars in earmarks and grants for green energy ventures). These billions have also been a way to pay back donors and Bundlers for Barack.
The latest scandal to come to light is the immorality tale of Solynda — a solar company that had failure stamped all over it according to private and government analysts, but that nevertheless was granted a 500 million dollar plus loan guarantee by Obama’s Department of Energy through a process that ignored government rules meant to protect taxpayers. It was a process that seemingly was greased by active intervention by the White House and perhaps frequent visits to the White House by George Kaiser, whose foundation is the single largest private investor in Solyndra.
Kaiser is a major Democratic donor and bundler for Barack Obama. The Energy Information Administration says that 14.7 billion dollars in taxpayers’ money was handed directly to renewable energy companies last year. Recall that it was President Obama himself who defined politics as a way to “reward friends.”
The jobs being protected by this outpouring of money are those of Obama and Biden and their friends in the federal government and Democratic Party.
But, I digress . Obama doesn’t mention his donors that benefit from his spending; he instead touts the jobs being generated — if not the electricity (because these ventures seldom generate any). As the Weekly Standard aptly puts it “green jobs have become a euphemism for crony capitalism” .
In 2009, Obama dedicated $7.2 billion dollars of stimulus to build ‘clean tech” jobs.
How has he done so far on that job front?
There is a litany of failed efforts to create jobs. Three hundred million dollars went to Johnson Controls to make electric batteries. According to the White House, which errs on the side of optimism if not delusion, that led to the creation of …drum roll please…150 jobs. That comes out to a cost of $2 million per job. Investor’s Business Daily has listed more examples of the “Wasted Stimulus” but the examples abound are far too numerous to list in a single column. Green jobs are a myth-like unicorns, writes Walter Russell Mead.
The headlines say it all. Even the non-partisan but left-leaning Politico recently published a column regarding how “Green Jobs success eludes Obama.” But the ultimate shock to the body politic was when no less than the New York Times ran a column headlined “Number of Green Jobs Fails to Live Up to Promises.” Aaron Glantz wrote in this piece:
Federal and state efforts to stimulate creation of green jobs have largely failed, government records show. Two years after it was awarded $186 million in federal stimulus money to weatherize drafty homes, California has spent only a little over half that sum and has so far created the equivalent of just 538 full-time jobs in the last quarter, according to the State Department of Community Services and Development.
The weatherization program was initially delayed for seven months while the federal Department of Labor determined prevailing wage standards for the industry. Even after that issue was resolved, the program never really caught on.
Ironically, job growth has been stalled because of the unions’ insistence that the Davis-Bacon Act be followed and not waived by President Obama. This union-favored act requires workers on federally-funded projects be paid the prevailing wage standards for the type of work in that area. Those “prevailing” wages usually are determined to be high union wages. Abiding by the Davis-Bacon Act (which can be waived by the President, as George Bush did after Katrina to speed job growth and reconstruction) is a way to make unions — if not taxpayers who foot the bill — happy.
Glantz reminds readers that Obama pledged to create 5 million green jobs over 10 years but that the results so far suggest such numbers are a “pipe dream”.
It is a useful exercise to compare and contrast the job growth in the oil and gas industry versus that of the green economy. In other words, compare reality versus fantasy. Stephen Moore writes in the Wall Street Journal:
President Obama is expected to seek another $250 billion or so in new stimulus funds next week, with plenty of money for clean energy and the creation of so-called green jobs.
Never mind that no one can seem to find many Americans who got green jobs as a result of the original stimulus spending.
Moore does note that energy jobs are being created at a rapid clip, but in the one sector that Obama considers a mortal political enemy and villain; the oil and gas industry.
According to data from the Federal Reserve Board’s Industrial Production Indexes, the oil and gas industry, which the Obama Energy Department loathes, has had more growth in output than any other manufacturing industry in the U.S. from 2005 through 2011. As a reward, the administration is proposing $35 billion in new taxes on the industry to slow it down. Even if we accept the dubious White House claim that all the oil and gas tax write-offs are unwarranted loopholes, a 2011 Congressional Research Service study finds that per unit of electricity produced, for every two cents of tax subsidy to Big Oil, Big Green (wind and solar) get closer to $1 in handouts.
A huge source of this job growth that has revitalized communities and enriched government coffers with lease payments and taxes has been the shale gas industry — that Obama and fellow Democrats seem determined to stop (see “Cheap natural gas and its Democratic Enemies“).
But we get the spin about green energy and green jobs.
But how did such a dream-such a green scheme-get started and how will it run its course?
Spain: A Precursor of Our Future Under Obama
I recently had a chance to interview Gabriel Calzada, an economics professor from Spain, whose pioneering work on the interplay between green energy subsides and job creation has been widely cited. His conclusion, backed up by data and facts not blind hope, is that 2.2 jobs are lost for each one “created” by government promotion of green energy jobs. Money is taken from productive parts of the economy and channeled for political purposes into wasteful green energy projects. The damage is compounded by the very high energy prices that come from the “free” energy of the sun and wind. His work is especially relevant because Obama has praised Spain no fewer than eight times as a role model for a green economy.
So how sunny are the prospects for Spain?
Gianluca Baratti of Bloomberg News writes in “Job Losses from Obama Green Stimulus Foreseen in Spanish Study”:
Subsidizing renewable energy in the U.S. may destroy two jobs for every one created if Spain’s experience with windmills and solar farms is any guide.
For every new position that depends on energy price supports, at least 2.2 jobs in other industries will disappear, according to a study from King Juan Carlos University in Madrid…
The premiums paid for solar, biomass, wave and wind power – – which are charged to consumers in their bills — translated into a $774,000 cost for each Spanish “green job” created since 2000, said Gabriel Calzada, an economics professor at the university and author of the report.
“The loss of jobs could be greater if you account for the amount of lost industry that moves out of the country due to higher energy prices,” he said in an interview.
When I asked Professor Calzada about the genesis of Spain’s green energy program he answered that it was the desire of Spanish political elites to be “world leaders” that drove the program — and the Spanish economy off the cliff. Ironically, it was the Conservative Party in Spain that created the legislation that led to this disaster (it allowed so called feed-in tariffs to boost prices paid for renewable energy; California is among the states in America that have similar programs). But it was the socialists who used this law to create a vast renewable power industry fueled by government taxing, borrowing, and spending.
It was the desire of political elites to be perceived to be world leaders that led to this disaster. That certainly has echoes here in America when such terminology is repeatedly used by Barack Obama to justify his Green Schemes. It would not be the first time that personal ego played a role in damaging a nation. Indeed, Barack Obama seems to have a bit of an Edifice Complex –the problem arises when we have to pay for monuments that gratify his ego.
Professor Calzada explained that jobs were not the initial impetus behind the launch of vast programs to set up wind and solar farms. That only came later when promoters grasped onto then as a way to rationalize continued wasteful spending. Then banks and other financial institutions joined the party, lending vast sums to the promoters of the ventures. A vicious circle developed; banks were so heavily invested in these boondoggles that pulling the plug on government spending would bankrupt many of the Green Energy companies they had extended loans to. So then banks, to protect their own future, started promoting green energy programs and the prospects of politicians who would stand with them. Jobs would be lost, loans would go bad, companies would go bankrupt — so the spending spree continued. But, as Margaret Thatcher noted, the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.
Spain is now teetering on the brink of economic ruin. All the solar and wind farms on the sun-drenched plains of Spain will not restore the nation to health. They are saddled with sky-high energy bills (the price of electricity has soared over 100% since the Socialist took power in 2004) and weighed down by vast amounts of debt spent to boost the egos of politicians and line the pockets of profiteers who depend on them.
The victims of course were the Spanish people — those who lost their jobs, those who faced a bleak economy, and those in years to come who will be responsible for paying back the vast amounts borrowed to fuel these pipedreams. There is some hope though: the Socialists have recently been trounced in the polls. The Spanish people are rebelling.
They are also trying to warn us. There has been a tsunami of solar bankruptcies in Spain as subsides have been cut. One Spanish newspaper had a headline, “Spain admits that the green economy sold to Obama is a ruin .” That is the same snake oil he is trying to peddle to Americans.
I had the opportunity to ask Professor Calzada if he had been in contact with the Obama administration. He said that he had twice tried to contact Energy Secretary Chu to inform him that he was coming to America and would be more than happy to meet with administration officials to discuss his work on green energy programs and job creation. Chu was too busy to meet with Calzada. Nor would he even send an underling to discuss Calzada’s findings. Wasn’t this the team that prided itself on respecting science and facts and listening to the views of others?
Calzada also volunteered that the Center for America Progress (CAP) has roundly criticized his work. This is the Obama-allied think tank funded to a large extent by George Soros. The opposition from the CAP is no surprise. Soros has proclaimed that he will invest at least a billion dollars in “green energy.” Soros has also been a major supporter of Barack Obama, whose policies look to benefit his political patron. Soros himself spilled the beans when he said in a New Yorker profile that there are “symbiotic moments between political and business interests”. We are living in such a moment now.
Obama never seems to learn while in office. He will again double down on the failed policies that have already caused a great deal of damage and will be even more harmful in years to come as we follow the Spanish model.
Calzada ended our conversation with a poignant question: why are we trying to harm ourselves?
A better question for Americans might be: why is Obama trying to harm us and how do we stop him?
Ed Lasky is news editor of American Thinker.