The Daily Caller shows how CRC investigates and exposes the Left

DailyCaller_grab

Capital Research Center is in the headlines for the work it does educating the American people about the network of radical left-wing nonprofit groups and super wealthy funders that want to fundamentally transform the country.

Ginni Thomas of the Daily Caller News Foundation interviewed Scott Walter, who became CRC president earlier this year.

In the video interview Walter boiled down what we do at Capital Research Center and why we do it.

The Left has a “Borg-like” consciousness he said, offering an homage to the Star Trek franchise. Walter said left-leaning people are much more open to emotional appeals than conservatives who tend to prioritize real-world facts in policy discussions. To combat the Left, it is important to understand that first and foremost the Left is about power.

In other words, conservatives care most about ideas; those on the Left care most about power.

Highlights from the interview:

Continue reading →

Twitter censors self-defense advocate

image

The unrest in Charlotte, North Carolina brought out once again the fascistic tendencies of Twitter which suspended the account of law professor Glenn Reynolds for daring to urge riot victims on the highway to protect themselves.

As angry rioters were surrounding and threatening passersby in their cars, Reynolds, who blogs under the name Instapundit, gave the commonsense advice that those endangered in their cars should use their cars as weapons. They should “run them down,” he tweeted.

That got Reynolds suspended.

At the same time Twitter routinely takes no action against militant blacks urging violence against white people.

Twitter would prefer that innocent people in Charlotte get slaughtered by racist thugs.

No coughing breaks allowed Monday

According to the Drudge Report, “[if] presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton slips into a coughing fit or any other medical crisis during Monday’s high-stakes debate, she will have to power through[.]”

This decision comes from the Commission on Presidential Debates.

Presumably if Donald Trump has coughing fits he too will have to power through.

The commission, for what it’s worth, is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. On its website it declares

It is not controlled by any political party or outside organization and it does not endorse, support or oppose political candidates or parties. It receives no funding from the government or any political party, political action committee or candidate. The CPD has sponsored general election presidential debates in every election since 1988.

Drudge continues:

“There are no commercial breaks,” a commission source explains. “Period.”

Debate moderator Lester Holt does not have the authority to cut away from the stage during the epic 90-minute showdown. And microphone audio for either of the candidates is not to be manipulated.

Clinton has experienced severe coughing episodes throughout the election year. During a Labor Day campaign stop she suffered a 4-minute choking marathon.

Monday’s throwdown could top out at 100 million viewers, making it the biggest political event in history.

EDITOR’S NOTE: The presidential debate commission settled an early flashpoint when Clinton demanded a step-stool at the podium to add height to her 5’4″ frame. Campaign Chairman John Podesta expressed concern that Hillary would be dwarfed by 6’2″ Trump. The request was quickly rejected. The commission is allowing for a custom-made podium, which will accommodate the difference in stature.

Obama’s CIA director voted for a Communist Party candidate

hammer_sickle_cia

In the Obama era, nothing is shocking anymore.

“Who won the Cold War again?” asks Daniel Greenfield at FrontPageMag:

CIA Director John Brennan voted for the Communist Party candidate in the 1976 presidential election.

Brennan told a congressional panel last week that he “froze” while taking a CIA polygraph test four years later when the questioner asked him if he had ever worked with or for a group that was “dedicated to overthrowing the U.S.,” CNN reported.

“This was back in 1980, and I thought back to a previous election where I voted, and I voted for the Communist Party candidate,” Brennan said at a panel discussion regarding diversity in the intelligence community during the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s annual conference.

“If he had admitted to voting for the Nazi Party, he would have been hounded out of everywhere. And rightly so,” argues Greenfield.

“What’s wrong is that voting for a mass murdering totalitarian ideology is just considered a whimsical act of a passionate young man. This is the pernicious double standard that has allowed the left to evade its moral responsibility for the crimes of the left.”

Brennan’s admission ought to automatically disqualify him as CIA director but in the Obama administration he’s just another powerful radical anti-American miscreant.

The candidate he admitted voting for in 1976 was Gus Hall, a four-time presidential candidate for the Communist Party USA (CPUSA).

Helping the poor by feeding the rich

shutterstock_192730931

Helping the poor by feeding the rich
By Martin Morse Wooster
Senior Fellow, Capital Research Center

(originally posted at Philanthropy Daily)

Suppose you run a restaurant that many food and wine magazines rate the world’s best, a place where you have to wait six months for a table. Your company now makes $4 million a year, and you want to do something philanthropic. What do you do?

If you’re Claus Meyer, a Danish food entrepreneur who owns Copenhagen’s renowned Noma restaurant, you open Gustu, a luxurious restaurant in La Paz, Bolivia.

Meyer’s efforts at building a social enterprise in the Third World are discussed by Carolyn Kormann in this New Yorker article. (Kormann previously wrote for the New Yorker about Foldscopes, which I discussed in this piece)

Meyer explained to Kormann that he didn’t set out to be a millionaire. He wanted to create a place where customers could enjoy local ingredients, served well. He helped create the “New Nordic Food Manifesto,” which called for food producers to have “purity, freshness, simplicity, and ethics” in what they made and sold.

But after becoming relatively wealthy, Meyer decided to see if he could create a nice restaurant in a country where the restaurant’s purchases could help local farmers find new markets. Kormann explained that he first wrote to the European Union’s agriculture commissioner, asking for any suggestions about countries that could use his help. He received no response, and decided to look for “a poor (but not too poor) place with exceptional biodiversity and very little crime.” He nearly decided on Vietnam, but realized that Vietnamese cuisine was fully developed. Then he learned about Bolivia, which has, according to Meyer, “a great undiscovered larder of fantastic products to be seduced by.”

Continue reading →

David Brock’s Money Laundering Exposed

David Brock, founder of Correct the Record, speaks at the Clinton School of Public Service in Little Rock, Ark., Tuesday, March 25, 2014. (AP Photo/Danny Johnston)

A report came out today detailing the alleged money laundering scheme run by David Brock, the once-conservative journalist turned political operative for the Clintons.

As the report on The Citizens Audit explains:

David Brock has 7 non-profits, 3 Super PACs, one 527-committee, one LLC, one joint fundraising committee, and one unregistered solicitor crammed into his office in Washington DC.

Uncovered records expose a constant flow of money between these organizations.

The Bonner Group, his professional solicitor, works off a commission.  Every time money gets passed around, Bonner receives a 12.5% cut.

It appears that Brock has been passing around donations quite a bit, giving The Bonner Group a handout each time.

In 2014, Media Matters for America raised $10,021,188.

The Bonner Group was credited for raising these funds.  Media Matters paid them a $1,147,882 commission.

That same year, Media Matters gave a $930,000 cash grant to David Brock’s Franklin Education Forum, an organization that shares office space with Media Matters.

In 2014, the Franklin Education Forum reported $994,000 in total contributions.  93.6% of that total came from Media Matters!

Surprisingly, though, the Franklin Education Forum gave full credit to Bonner for raising that money.  They paid the fundraiser a $124,250 commission in 2014!

As all of these groups exist within Brock’s DC office, it would be difficult for him to claim he had no idea this was going on. The report continues:

Furthermore, the New York Times reports that David Brock shares a summer rental in the Hamptons with Mary Pat Bonner, the President of the Bonner Group!

How interesting.

Read the full report here.

For more information on David Brock, read Matthew Vadum’s August article or the December 2014 Organization Trends.

A helpful reminder where the “FemiNazi” epithet comes from

gpvircld

I seem to recall that it was Rush Limbaugh who coined the term “feminazi” to describe the most militant of feminists. It was from about two decades ago when feminists, who were especially aggressive on university campuses, openly embraced totalitarianism.

Intellectuals Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon embraced a fascistic form of feminism that sought to dictate how Americans thought and behaved.

MacKinnon, amazingly enough a law professor, injected a virulent poison into criminal law. “I call it rape whenever a woman has sex and feels violated,” she is on record as saying.

Dworkin was as original and nutty. “[W]omen live with those who oppress them, sleep with them, have their children — we are tangled, hopelessly it seems, in the gut of the machinery and way of life which is ruinous to us,” she said.

For years it seemed like Dworkin and MacKinnon’s stifling fem-fascism was fading away.

But now it seems to be coming back. CNN talking head Sally Kohn (pictured above), whom no one would mistake for a thoughtful person, is openly embracing outlawing thought with which she disagrees.

This buffoonish in-your-face leftist lesbian said it’s a good thing if conservatives feel unable to express their views for fear of facing hostility from their peers or professors.

“If they feel like they can no longer speak against positive social change, good,” Kohn said.

Yes, she actually said that during a debate at the University of Missouri. Such advocacy is merely an excuse for criticizing multiculturalism and other progressive ideas, she explained.

Think about that — while you still can.

Black Lives Matter: Racist Provocation with Radical Roots

This article is part of the Organization Trends series.

By James Simpson

At the time of this writing, prosecutors had just dropped charges against the last three of six police officers accused in the death of Baltimore drug dealer Freddie Gray. The decision closes an ugly chapter in that sad story, in which the highly politicized Baltimore City state’s attorney, Marilyn Mosby, accused them of murder. The city descended into days of violence and destruction after Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake infamously gave space to rioters “who wished to destroy.” But that riot was only one chapter in a still-evolving story of death and destruction provoked by a false narrative of oppression and police brutality.

The Black Lives Matter movement (BLM) casts itself as a spontaneous uprising born of inner-city frustration, but it is in fact the latest and most dangerous face of a web of well-funded socialist/communist organizations that have been agitating against America for decades.

BLM claims to be non-violent. According to its website (BlackLivesMatter.com), “The Black Lives Matter Network advocates for dignity, justice, and respect. … Black activists have raised the call for an end to violence, not an escalation of it.”

Yet BLM activists are routinely observed screaming violent obscenities and attacking police. For example, this past July, 21 police were injured by rocks, steel pipes, and fireworks during a demonstration in St. Paul, Minnesota, where protesters shut down the interstate for five hours. One officer suffered a spinal fracture after a concrete block was dropped on his head. At a Minneapolis fair protest last summer, BLM activists shouted, “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon!”

In her recent book The War on Cops, Manhattan Institute fellow Heather Mac Donald argues that the BLM movement and the fallout from it have made the inner city much more dangerous, as police forces adopt hands-off policies in response to growing hostility. Some call it the “Ferguson effect,” named after the Missouri town where a young black man, Michael Brown, was killed when he tried to kill a white police officer. Cops across the nation are afraid to patrol black neighborhoods and are overly cautious when dealing with black suspects. Despite their diminished forcefulness in high-crime neighborhoods, police are still being assaulted and killed. Continue reading →

Was Obamacare designed to fail?

obamacare-failure

Well, DUH!

Of course Obamacare was designed to fail. The system is built on lies. It is a Trojan horse for a total government takeover of health care in the United States.

In an op-ed in The Hill, Jeffrey I. Barke, M.D., who practices family medicine in Newport Beach, Calif., examines the issue. He writes:

As ObamaCare’s troubles mount, I’ve heard my patients and my peers in healthcare ask: How could the law’s authors not have seen this coming? For my part, I think a different question needs to be asked: What if they did? What if ObamaCare was purposely designed to fail?

Every day, it seems like there are a dozen new headlines about the crisis facing ObamaCare. Premiums are rising faster than ever. Meanwhile, health insurance companies are abandoning the law’s exchanges left and right, unable to compete in the top-down, regulation-driven environment created by the law. Less than three years into its implementation, the law has never looked so precarious.

This vindicates the critics who have predicted these outcomes for years. They were laughed out of the room when they said the law would enter into a “death spiral,” but now that looks like an inevitability. Even the law’s most ardent defenders — including its namesake, President Obama — are calling for serious reforms to stop the law from imploding. Inevitably, the solutions they demand are more regulation, more government, more top-down control of Americans’ health care.

Then again, that may have always been the plan. It now seems to me that ObamaCare’s creators weren’t blind to what they were doing — they were playing a long game that is just now coming to fruition.

Dr. Barke is late to the party but he’s definitely welcome to grab a beer, sit down on a comfortable couch, and stick around.

The evidence has been around since before Barack Obama became president.

Yale University political science professor Jacob Hacker, known as the “father of the public option” admitted at a Tides Foundation event in 2008 that Obamacare would lead to a single-payer health care system.

Hacker said:

Someone once said to me, ‘Well, this is a Trojan horse for single payer.’ Well, it’s not a Trojan horse, right? It’s just right there! I’m telling you, we’re going to get there over time, slowly, but we’ll move away from reliance on employment based health insurance as we should. But we’re going to do it in a way that we’re not going to frighten people into thinking that they’re going to lose their private insurance.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has admitted Obamacare was designed to fail in order to clear the way for a single-payer system.

Capital Research Center alumnus David Hogberg says more or less the same thing.

Obamacare is in a death spiral, Hogberg says. “A death spiral occurs when not enough young and healthy people sign up for health insurance. Thanks to Obamacare’s design, a death spiral is inevitable.”

The above is only a tiny portion of the evidence available, by the way.

So of course Obamacare was designed to fail. It’s a gigantic con job. It was drawn up in such a way that it would eventually collapse thus theoretically clearing the way for single-payer.

Birthered in the U.S.A.

obama_certificate_of_live_birth

[Continuing our series on deception in politics and public policy.]

The so-called “birther” story—the claim that President Obama was born outside the U.S. and is not a “natural born Citizen,” thus ineligible to be president—was back in the news last week.  Was it spread, as Donald Trump alleged, by the Clinton organization?

Among those allegedly spreading the birther story during the 2008 campaign: Sidney Blumenthal, Clinton’s top political advisor. According to James Asher, former Washington bureau chief of the McClatchy Company, one of the nation’s top news organizations, Blumenthal suggested to him that Obama was born in Kenya, and sought to persuade Asher to pursue the story—which Asher did, leading to a determination that the birther story was false.

The Washington Post, in a news story Friday, characterized as false Donald Trump’s charge that “Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy,” with the Post calling Trump’s claim “an assertion that has been repeatedly disproved by fact-checkers who have found no evidence that Clinton or her campaign questioned Obama’s birth certificate or his citizenship.” The rest of the media followed suit. The idea that the Clinton campaign was involved in the birther effort was a “false conspiracy,” reported the Associated Press. It was “a claim that does not stand up to scrutiny,” said Reuters.

In an effort to exonerate the Clinton organization from charges of ties to “birtherism,” some in the news media cling to the technicality that Blumenthal was supposedly not a part of the 2008 Clinton campaign. They claim that, while Blumenthal might have spread the rumor, Clinton’s campaign didn’t. For example, John Berman on CNN said that his organization “reached out to Clinton campaign staffers to say, to their knowledge, at that time, Sidney Blumenthal did not work for the campaign, but, yes, he is a friend of Hillary Clinton.”

Even McClatchy News, in reporting the allegations of one of its former editors, stated that “there is no evidence that Clinton herself or her campaign spread the story.” Again, the point is that the person spreading the story was just Sidney Blumenthal, a Clinton friend, not someone from the campaign.

That characterization of Blumenthal as someone who was not a member of the Clinton campaign is contradicted by the words of Mark Penn, the Clinton 2008 campaign’s pollster as well as its chief strategist. In an interview in GQ magazine, published June 12, 2008, Penn defended himself from accusations that he had overcharged the campaign for his services. He pointed out that the money paid to his business organization (the firm Penn Schoen Berland) went mostly for expenses, such as printing and postage related to direct mail.  Penn said that much of the money, payments that people assumed went to Penn himself, in fact went to “Sid Blumenthal.”

[Question:] You’ve been accused of making obscene amounts of money from this campaign. Can you clear that up for us?

[Penn:] Well, people think, you know… The reality is, the way that money’s been reported, all the printing and the postage—you know, 85 percent of the work has been for direct mail, of which almost all that is postage and printing and all that

[Question:] So when they come out with, like, ‘Mark Penn was paid $4 million,’ $3.4 million of that was postage?

[Penn:] The actual consulting fee is, you know, we received $27,000 a month, which is split between me and Sid Blumenthal [described by GQ as “a senior advisor”]. So it makes the net around half that.

[Question:] Wait, Sid makes as much as you?

[Penn:] You know, again, I don’t own these companies, so—

[Question:] No, really, Sid Blumenthal makes as much as you?

[Penn:] His fee is about the same.

So Sidney Blumenthal, according to Penn, was paid “about the same” as him, or, roughly half of the $27,000-a-month consulting fee paid by the Clinton campaign.

If you believe the news media, Blumenthal—Hillary Clinton’s closest political advisor, the apparent partner of her campaign’s chief strategist, and a man who was paid by the campaign at a rate corresponding to more than $160,000 a year—was not “the Clinton campaign.” If not, then who, besides Hillary Clinton herself, would be?

Continue reading →

Fabulous new garbage diet sweeps Venezuela

shutterstock_377593231

If socialist Bernie Sanders ran a media outlet, we might see the above headline on a story about how starving Venezuelans have been eating tasty roadkill, vermin, and municipal waste in order to survive.

Don’t laugh. Remember that Sanders said breadlines are a good thing.

“You know, it’s funny. Sometimes American journalists talk about how bad a country is when people are lining up for food. That’s a good thing. In other countries, people don’t line up for food. The rich get the food and the poor starve to death,” Sanders said years ago.

Venezuela, by the way, has an estimated annual inflation rate of 700 percent, and Venezuelans are being sent to forced labor camps.

As 15 percent of Venezuelans admit they can only survive nowadays by eating “food waste discarded by commercial establishments,” it is clear that Venezuela is on the verge of famine. Almost half of respondents in a study in South America’s largest food desert say they have had to take time off work to scavenge for food.

The study — conducted by More Consulting and published in the Spanish-language Diario de las Américas — reflects a reality that has become the signature of President Nicolás Maduro’s tenure: a food and medicine shortage that forces most in the nation to wait in supermarket lines that can last up to eight hours. On many occasions, after the wait, they find that there is nothing left to buy.

The More Consulting study found that three out of every four Venezuelans (72 percent) was unable to feed themselves an optimal diet of breakfast, lunch, and dinner. 24.2 percent say they rarely eat protein, living off of local tubers like yuca and malanga and some fruit. More than half of Venezuelans (52.3 percent) buy their foods through the black market, from private individuals who have stocked a surplus of an item they need.

53.9 percent of Venezuelan respondents said they had gone to bed hungry, 48 percent say they have been forced to take time off work to scrounge for food.

The numbers align with previous surveys taken earlier this year, following the declaration of a “nutritional emergency” by the Venezuelan National Assembly in February. In June, The New York Times cited a poll by Simón Bolívar University finding that nearly 90 percent of Venezuelans did not have the money necessary to buy food for three full meals a day. The Times estimated then that an average of 50 violent incidents involving supermarkets, food cargo trucks, or other food sources had occurred within a two-week span of time.

President Maduro created a socialist rationing system in April 2014. Police and soldiers are going after people who hoard food or try to purchase more than their fair share.

Venezuelans are using a new euphemism for starvation. They call it “Maduro’s diet.”