Colonel (r) Richard H. Black, a former Virginia State Senator, and a former officer in the United States Navy General Advocacy Corps (JAG), noted that retired generals have now gone active in a conspiracy military against President Donald Trump. Colonel Black points out that these generals are violating Section 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Give the names and say what the President should order Defense Secretary Mark Esper to do if he is not doing it on his own initiative. The insurgent generals have used the publication Defense One to promote the overthrow of Donald Trump.
This publication is now owned by the Atlantic Media company, especially Laurene Powell Jobs, who has been crucial in financing the political campaign that supports Kamala Harris (vice presidential candidate for the Democratic Party) . In addition, Atlantic Media also publishes The Atlantic magazine that is propagating the narrative that Trump is denigrating the armed forces and that he will not acknowledge his defeat in the November 2020 presidential elections.
For her part, the wage earner of the globalist elites, Hillary Clinton, has said that Joe Biden should not recognize an electoral victory of Donald Trump because this possible victory would surely be the product of fraud. Defense One magazine, for its part, states that the United States armed forces must prepare to remove Donald Trump from power as of January 20, when he refuses to hand over power (something Trump has never said he was thinking do).
Just opened the online Columbus Dispatch news site - top headlines:BOOM! The report also connects Biden with prostitution and human trafficking.
Scoopyweb giving Babylon Bee a run for the money!Democrats Say Hunter Biden’s Massive Scandal Is Nowhere Near As Bad As That Time Trump Did Nothing Wrong *
The media and other Democrats say reports of Hunter Biden’s massive corruption are nowhere near as bad as that time Donald Trump did nothing wrong.
The charges against Hunter were detailed in a congressional report which was issued in the form of a poster-size photograph of Hunter under the words, “Have you seen this man?”
The report says Hunter received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina, a Russian who became rich after receiving lucrative contracts from the city of Moscow, where her husband was mayor.
Democrats say there’s nothing to see here because it was the sort of payment anyone might receive from a deeply corrupt Russian businesswoman in return for absolutely nothing.
The report also says Hunter paid large amounts of money to what “appears to be an Eastern European prostitution or human trafficking ring.”
But Democrats say there’s nothing to see here because Hunter probably needed a massage after carrying around all that heavy money from Elena Baturina.
The report says further that Hunter made more millions as a consultant to the energy company Burisma even though he had no expertise in the field.
But Democrats say there’s nothing to see here because they’ve ripped out their eyeballs and set them on fire so there’s literally nothing they can see.
Even officials within the Obama administration were concerned that Hunter’s behavior while his father was Vice President might have created the impression that the Bidens were running a corrupt scam out of the White House, but Democrats say there’s nothing to see here because skiddleewink shaban do-do kragnatz.
Reporters immediately gathered around Joe Biden’s basement to ask the candidate such tough questions as “What does it say about Donald Trump’s soul, that after killing thousands of people by giving them coronavirus, he has the gall to accuse your beloved son of some sort of wrongdoing just because he made millions off corrupt Russian and Ukranian officials while you were VP?”
Biden responded, “Come on, man. Here’s the deal,” and Democrats say that clears up everything.
Democrats Say Hunter Biden’s Massive Scandal Is Nowhere Near As Bad As That Time Trump Did Nothing Wrong [Satire]
WASHINGTON, Nov 2 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump’s “America First” trade policy torched a 70-year consensus on trade liberalization, drew a harder line against China’s state-driven economic model and erected new tariffs on imported steel and aluminum, alienating allies.
Trump is touting his efforts to protect American workers and a Phase 1 trade deal with China that promises to boost U.S. exports as closing arguments in Tuesday’s presidential election.
Economic data so far shows mixed results from that effort, with some sectors gaining at the expense of others, but with little change in the overall U.S. trade deficit for goods and services.
Since 2018, Trump has imposed punitive tariffs on imported washing machines, solar panels, steel, aluminum and goods from China and Europe, with Chinese imports accounting for most of the nearly $80 billion collected so far.
The tariff war against China started with a 2017 investigation into longstanding U.S. complaints about Chinese state-driven economic policies, including intellectual property theft, forced technology transfers and rampant subsidies to state-owned firms that were pushing the U.S. trade deficit higher.
Business interests largely supported the goals of the “Section 301” probe, but warned that tariffs would hurt U.S. competitiveness by raising input costs.
Retaliations and escalations eventually imposed tariffs on $370 billion in Chinese goods before the Phase 1 deal was signed in January, committing Beijing to boost purchases of U.S. farm and manufactured goods, energy and services by $200 billion over two years.
Thus far, the tariffs have reduced imports of goods from China but have not significantly altered the global U.S. goods and services trade deficit.
Companies responded by diversifying supply chains, shifting some production out of China – but mostly to other low-wage countries, such as Vietnam and Mexico, not to the United States.
One of Trump’s goals was to increase American manufacturing jobs. The numbers have grown since he took office in 2017, partly due to a massive corporate tax cut. But manufacturing employment growth slowed after he launched the tariffs in 2018, becoming a trickle before the coronavirus pandemic hit in early 2020.
The Federal Reserve’s measure of U.S. manufacturing output also peaked in 2018.
Trump angered U.S. allies in Europe, Asia and the Americas by imposing 25% tariffs on steel and 10% on aluminum in 2018 on national security grounds.
The tariffs prompted new investment in the sector and restarts of some idled mills, including U.S. Steel Corp’s Granite City Works in Illinois. But the hiring renaissance was short-lived as lower prices caused some closures, including one of two blast furnace at Granite City, where Trump heralded the industry’s renaissance in July 2018.
Steel industry executives have argued that without the tariff protections, domestic steelmakers would be in far worse shape because of a global production glut largely centered in China. The tariffs have cut the market share of imports, allowing domestic steelmakers to utilize more of their capacity.
“NO DISASTERS”Backers of Trump’s trade strategy argue that it did not lead to the major dislocations predicted by industry and won bigger concessions from China than any previous U.S. president did.
It pushed U.S. companies to diversify away from China and move some critical supply chains to the United States, said Stephen Vaughn, former general counsel at the U.S. Trade Representative’s office.
“All the sorts of disasters that people on the other side predicted literally never happened,” said Vaughn, now a trade partner at the King and Spalding law firm. “Even if you assume that all of the tariffs were paid by consumers, an $80 billion tax increase was never going to tank a $22 trillion economy.”
While Trump’s Phase 1 trade deal is now starting to boost agricultural exports to China after a slow start amid the COVID-19 pandemic, it failed to address many of the issues that really matter to U.S. companies. These include China’s technology transfer policies, industrial subsidies and barriers to digital services access in China.
“There’s still a legitimate question about what all this pain was paying for,” said Nasim Fussell, who served until August as the Republican trade counsel on the U.S. Senate Finance Committee. “There will be pressure from stakeholders to work towards a Phase 2” to address more substantive issues, added Fussell, now a trade lawyer at Holland and Knight.
But China remains barely more than halfway to its first year purchase targets on the Phase 1 trade deal, particularly for manufactured goods during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to trade data calculations by Chad Bown, a senior fellow with the Peterson Institute for International Economics.
Economic factors such as commodity prices, Chinese tariffs, slack demand for air travel and a swine flu epidemic in China are weighing heavily on the export flows, Bown said.
“The dictum of ‘You need to buy more’ doesn’t necessarily seem to work.”
(Reporting by David Lawder; editing by Heather Timmons and Richard Chang)
(c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2020.
President Trump originally announced his intention to withdraw from the landmark agreement in 2017 and formally notified the United Nations last year. A mandatory yearlong waiting period ends on Wednesday, a coincidence that nonetheless highlights the Trump administration's commitment to derailing efforts that address climate change.
The U.S. has emitted more cumulative carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than any other country since the industrial era began in the mid-1800s. Current U.S. emissions are falling, but far too slowly to avoid catastrophic warming. That's in part because the Trump administration rolled back carbon pollution limits from power plants, cars, trucks and fossil fuel operations. American emissions rose slightly in the first two years of his administration. In 2020, the pandemic throttled the economy and led to a short-term dip.
"The lack of action at the federal level is a serious problem," says Rachel Cleetus, policy director for the climate and energy program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, a science advocacy group. The costs of climate-driven disasters such as hurricanes, heat waves and wildfires are rising, she says. In 2020, there have already been 16 climate-driven disasters that cost at least $1 billion each, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
"Climate change is clearly not just an environmental issue," Cleetus says. "It is threatening our economy. It's threatening our future prosperity, the well-being of future generations."
To promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.
“(1) To raise revenue needed by the Federal Government in a manner consistent with the other purposes of this subtitle.
“(2) To tax all consumption of goods and services in the United States once, without exception, but only once.
“(3) To prevent double, multiple, or cascading taxation.
“(4) To simplify the tax law and reduce the administration costs of, and the costs of compliance with, the tax law.
“(5) To provide for the administration of the tax law in a manner that respects privacy, due process, individual rights when interacting with the government, the presumption of innocence in criminal proceedings, and the presumption of lawful behavior in civil proceedings.
“(6) To increase the role of State governments in Federal tax administration because of State government expertise in sales tax administration.
“(7) To enhance generally cooperation and coordination among State tax administrators; and to enhance cooperation and coordination among Federal and State tax administrators, consistent with the principle of intergovernmental tax immunity.
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS.
(a) Findings Relating To Federal Income Tax.—Congress finds the Federal income tax—
(1) retards economic growth and has reduced the standard of living of the American public;
(2) impedes the international competitiveness of United States industry;
(3) reduces savings and investment in the United States by taxing income multiple times;
(4) slows the capital formation necessary for real wages to steadily increase;
(5) lowers productivity;
(6) imposes unacceptable and unnecessary administrative and compliance costs on individual and business taxpayers;
(7) is unfair and inequitable;
(8) unnecessarily intrudes upon the privacy and civil rights of United States citizens;
(9) hides the true cost of government by embedding taxes in the costs of everything Americans buy;
(10) is not being complied with at satisfactory levels and therefore raises the tax burden on law abiding citizens; and
(11) impedes upward social mobility.
“(7) PERSON.—The term ‘person’ means any natural person, and unless the context clearly does not allow it, any corporation, partnership, limited liability company, trust, estate, government, agency, administration, organization, association, or other legal entity (foreign or domestic).
This bill imposes a national sales tax on the use or consumption in the United States of taxable property or services in lieu of the current income taxes, payroll taxes, and estate and gift taxes. The rate of the sales tax will be 23% in 2021, with adjustments to the rate in subsequent years. There are exemptions from the tax for used and intangible property; for property or services purchased for business, export, or investment purposes; and for state government functions.
Under the bill, family members who are lawful U.S. residents receive a monthly sales tax rebate (Family Consumption Allowance) based upon criteria related to family size and poverty guidelines.
The states have the responsibility for administering, collecting, and remitting the sales tax to the Treasury.
Tax revenues are to be allocated among (1) the general revenue, (2) the old-age and survivors insurance trust fund, (3) the disability insurance trust fund, (4) the hospital insurance trust fund, and (5) the federal supplementary medical insurance trust fund.
No funding is authorized for the operations of the Internal Revenue Service after FY2023.
Finally, the bill terminates the national sales tax if the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution (authorizing an income tax) is not repealed within seven years after the enactment of this bill.
“SEC. 303. MONTHLY POVERTY LEVEL.
“(a) In General.—The monthly poverty level for any particular month shall be one-twelfth of the ‘annual poverty level’. For purposes of this section the ‘annual poverty level’ shall be the sum of—
“(1) the annual level determined by the Department of Health and Human Services poverty guidelines required by sections 652 and 673(2) of the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981 for a particular family size, and
“(2) in case of families that include a married couple, the ‘annual marriage penalty elimination amount’.
“SEC. 301. FAMILY CONSUMPTION ALLOWANCE.
“Each qualified family shall be eligible to receive a sales tax rebate each month. The sales tax rebate shall be in an amount equal to the product of—
“(1) the rate of tax imposed by section 101, and
“(2) the monthly poverty level.
“SEC. 706. NOT-FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS.
“(a) Not-For-Profit Organizations.—Dues, contributions, and similar payments to qualified not-for-profit organizations shall not be considered gross payments for taxable property or services for purposes of this subtitle.
“(b) Definition.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘qualified not-for-profit organization’ means a not-for-profit organization organized and operated exclusively—
“(1) for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes,
“(2) as civic leagues or social welfare organizations,
“(3) as labor, agricultural, or horticultural organizations,
“(4) as chambers of commerce, business leagues, or trade associations, or
“(5) as fraternal beneficiary societies, orders, or associations,
no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.
“(1) 64.83 percent of total revenue to general revenue,
“(2) 27.43 percent of total revenue to the old-age and survivors insurance and disability insurance trust funds, and
“(3) 7.74 percent of total revenue to the hospital insurance and Federal supplementary medical insurance trust funds.