Category Archives: government fraud spending collusion

Chicago: Judge Halts Construction of Obama Presidential Library

Posted on by

This is beginning to sound like all the corrupt land/mortgage deals during the mission to bring the Olympics to Chicago…remember that?

Chicago Park Board Approves Obama Library Land Transfer ...

About the Library

The Barack Obama Presidential Library is the 14th presidential library administered by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), a federal agency.

Unlike other Presidential Libraries administered by NARA, the Barack Obama Presidential Library will be a fully digital library.  After the records are digitized, NARA will store and preserve the original materials in an existing NARA facility that meets NARA’s standards for archival storage.  A staff at that location will be responsible for caring for the records and artifacts.

Currently, the Obama administration materials are housed in a temporary facility in Hoffman Estates, IL, which is not open to the public.  Obama presidential records are administered in accordance with the requirements of the Presidential Records Act (PRA) and will not be subject to public Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests until January 20, 2022.

About the Obama Presidential Center

The Obama Foundation is constructing the Obama Presidential Center on Chicago’s South Side in Jackson Park.  The Center will be a privately operated, non-federal organization. For the most current information on the Obama Presidential Center, visit their website at www.obama.org.

*** The judge nominated by former President Obama dealt a blow Tuesday to the former president’s efforts to build his presidential library in Chicago with a ruling that a lawsuit challenging the facility’s planned construction can go forward.

The Obamas just revealed a first look at the new Presidential Center in Chicago | Inhabitat ...

CHICAGO (AP) — A federal judge gave the green light Tuesday to a parks-advocacy group’s lawsuit that aims to stop for good the delayed construction of former President Barack Obama’s $500 million presidential center in a Chicago park beside Lake Michigan.

Supporters of the project had hoped the court would grant a city motion to throw out the lawsuit by Protect Our Parks, some fearing any drawn out litigation might lead Obama to decide to build the Obama Presidential Center somewhere other than his hometown.

A lawsuit brought by another group in 2016 helped to scuttle a $400 million plan by “Star Wars” creator George Lucas to build a museum on public land on Chicago’s lakefront. That museum is now under construction in Los Angeles .

Judge John Robert Blakey heard arguments last week on the city’s motion to dismiss. Blakey did toss parts of the suit in his Tuesday ruling, but concluded the group has standing to sue because it represent taxpayers with concerns that providing parkland in the public trust to the Obama center violates their due-process rights.

Blakey’s ruling doesn’t mean the group will necessarily prevail in the end, but confirms that the suit poses a formidable threat to the project. The judge indicated that he doesn’t want the litigation to drag out, and that he would strictly limit any fact gathering leading up to trial to 45 days.

“We are pleased that the court dismissed some of the claims and made clear that the proceedings will move forward expeditiously,” said Chicago corporation counsel Ed Siskel. It was also the view of the Obama Foundation in its one-sentence reaction to Blakey’s ruling.

Blakey tossed the plaintiffs’ claim that their First Amendment rights would be violated if tax money is used to construct a building to promote former President Barack Obama’s political interests.

He also found no merit in the plaintiffs’ claim they would suffer because of aesthetic and environmental harm to Jackson Park.

Blakey says his ruling “does not address the true facts of this case.”

Plans call for the center to be built in Jackson Park, which was named after President Andrew Jackson and was a site for the Chicago World’s Fair in 1893. The site 7 miles (11 kilometers) south of downtown Chicago is near low-income neighborhoods where Obama worked as a community organizer and is just blocks from the University of Chicago where Obama was a law professor. It is also close to the home where the Obamas lived until he won the presidency in 2008.

The center was originally slated to open in 2021, though ground hasn’t yet broken because of the lingering litigation.

In its 2018 suit , Protect Our Parks accused the city of illegally transferring park land to a private entity, The Obama Foundation, effectively “gifting” prized land to a Chicago favorite son. The group said city officials manipulated the approval process and tinkered with legislation to skirt long-standing laws designed to ensure residents have unobstructed access to lakeside parks.

“Defendants have chosen to deal with it in a classic Chicago political way … to deceive and seemingly legitimize an illegal land grab,” the lawsuit says.

To make the park available for the project, the Chicago Park District first sold the land to the city for $1. Illinois legislators amended the state’s Illinois Aquarium and Museum Act to include presidential libraries as an exception to the no-development rules if there’s a compelling public interest. The Chicago City Council approved the project by a 47-to-1 vote last May.

The Obama Foundation, a private nonprofit, would pay $10 to the city for use of the park land for 99 years, cover the costs of building the complex and be responsible for covering operating costs for 99 years. Once built, the Obama Presidential Center’s physical structures would be transferred to the city for free, meaning the city would formally own the center but not control what happens there.

“They are essentially giving (property) to Obama … for 10 cents a year for 99 years,” parks advocacy lawyer Mark Roth said Thursday.

In a friend-of-the-court brief , legal scholar Richard Epstein said public-trust doctrine places an extra burden on authorities to prove overwhelming public benefit when they offer the use of public parks to such well-connected figures as Obama, who remains hugely popular in the heavily Democratic city. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel once served as Obama’s White House chief of staff.

One claim Blakey tossed Tuesday was that taxpayers’ First Amendment rights would be infringed upon because tax money would be spent to reconfigure roads and traffic. The suit argued that taxpayers would thus subsidize any partisan political activity by Obama at the center.

City lawyers conceded Thursday that Chicago would pay an estimated $175 million to reconfigure roads to manage traffic around the center.

The lawsuit also claims that the center would interfere with migrating butterflies and birds.

City lawyers said Protect Our Parks misread the law, misrepresented how the approval process played out and exaggerated potential environmental disruptions.

The center would comprise 20 acres (8 hectares) of the 500-acre (202-hectare) park. Its centerpiece would be a 225-foot (69-meter) museum tower, surrounded by a cluster of smaller buildings, including a 300-seat auditorium.

City lawyers said it would bring a major economic boost to poor local minority communities. Backers estimate it would create 5,000 jobs during construction and over 2,500 permanent jobs. An estimated 760,000 people could visit each year.

U.S. is Presently Under 31 National Emergency Orders

Posted on by

Of particular note is during the peaceful transfer of power from Obama to Trump, Obama told Trump the number one threat to the United States and her interests is North Korea. Notice that Obama never made any declaration regarding North Korea. Notice too that under Obama, the Sinaola Cartel, the narco terror organization that killed thousands in Mexico and many in the United States was not part of any declaration. But….Obama did declare a national emergency due to the socialist revolution in Venezuela and hence that has caused 3 million Venezuelans to flee.

Oh yeah….nothing from Obama either regarding Islamic State and Syria or Iraq…..or Russia considering Moscow’s intrusion into our 2016 election systems…..

Image result for presidential emergency powers

***

According to the Federal Register, 58 national emergencies have been declared since the National Emergency Act of 1976 was signed into law by President Gerald Ford.

And 31 have been annually renewed and are currently still in effect, as listed in the Federal Register.

Here’s a list of the presidents who declared still ongoing national emergencies.

President Jimmy Carter

 

Nov 14, 1979: The National Emergency With Respect to Iran, in response to the Iran hostage crisis.

President Bill Clinton

Nov 14, 1994: The National Emergency With Respect to the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, that combined two previous national emergencies focused on weapons of mass destruction.

Jan. 2, 1995: The National Emergency With Respect to Prohibiting Transactions with Terrorists Who Threaten to Disrupt the Middle East Peace Process placed economic sanctions in response to the Jerusalem bombing.

March 15, 1995: The National Emergency With Respect to Prohibiting Certain Transactions with Respect to the Development of Iranian Petroleum Resources was an effort to prevent potential deals between oil companies.

October 21, 1995: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Assets and Prohibiting Transactions with Significant Narcotics Traffickers Centered in Colombia was declared after increased reports of drug cartels laundering money through American companies.

March 1, 1996: The National Emergency With Respect to Regulations of the Anchorage and Movement of Vessels with Respect to Cuba was after civilian planes were shot down near Cuba

November 3, 1997: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Sudanese Government Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Sudan implemented economic and trade sanctions.

President George W. Bush

 

June 26, 2001: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Persons Who Threaten International Stabilization Efforts in the Western Balkans imposed sanctions on those aiding Albanian insurgents in Macedonia

Aug 17, 2001: The National Emergency With Respect to Export Control Regulations renewed presidential power to control exports in a national emergency since the Export Administration Act of 1979 lapsed.

Sept 14, 2001: The National Emergency with Respect to Certain Terrorist Attacks was in response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks on the United States.

Sept 23, 2001: The National Emergency With Respect to Persons who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism was in response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

March 6, 2003: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Zimbabwe was an effort to punish associates of Robert Mugabe.

May 22, 2003: The National Emergency With Respect to Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq has an Interest was issued following the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

May 11, 2004: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons and Prohibiting the Export of Certain Goods to Syria was in response to Syria supporting terrorist activity in Iraq.

June 16, 2006: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Belarus was in response to charges of fraud in the Belarus presidential election.

Oct 27, 2006: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was in response to violence around the Congolese presidential election runoff.

Aug 1, 2007: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Persons Undermining the Sovereignty of Lebanon was in response to a breakdown of the rule of law in Lebanon.

June 26, 2008: The National Emergency With Respect to Continuing Certain Restrictions with Respect to North Korea cited the risk of proliferation of weapons-usable fissile material. President Trump renewed this June 22, 2018 citing the “existence and risk of proliferation of weapons-usable fissile material on the Korean Peninsula and the actions and policies of the Government of North Korea continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat.”

President Barack Obama

April 12, 2010: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in Somalia was in respect to threats posed by Somali pirates.

February 25, 2011: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property and Prohibiting Certain Transactions Related to Libya froze the assets of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

July 25, 2011: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Transnational Criminals was in response to the rise in crime by specific organizations: Los Zetas (Mexico), The Brothers’ Circle (former Soviet Union countries), the Yakuza (Japan), and the Camorra (Italy).

May 16, 2012: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Persons Threatening the Peace, Security, or Stability of Yemen addressed political unrest within the Yemen government.

March 16, 2014: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine was in response to the Russian invasion of Crimea.

April 3, 2014: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons With Respect to South Sudan was in response to the ongoing civil war.

May 12, 2014: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Central African Republic was in response to violence towards humanitarian aid workers.

March 8, 2015: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property and Suspending Entry of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Venezuela was in response to human rights violations.

April 1, 2015: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking the Property of Certain Persons Engaging in Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled Activities was in response to Chinese cyber attacks on the U.S.

Nov 23, 2015: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Burundi was declared after a failed coup.

President Donald Trump

 

Dec 20, 2017: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption imposed sanctions on the Myanmar general for his role persecuting Rohingya Muslims.

Sept 12, 2018: The National Emergency With Respect to Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election attempted to prevent any meddling with the 2018 midterm elections amid the ongoing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Nov 27, 2018: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Nicaragua was declared by President Trump in response to violence and the Ortega regime’s “systematic dismantling and undermining of democratic institutions and the rule of law” that constitutes an “unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.”

DHS Spending Bill IS FULL of Nasty Things

Posted on by

The bill is here if you choose to read it.

Image result for dhs funding border wall

1. The bill has language in that actually restricts who can do immigration sweeps and deportations.

2. That 55 miles of alleged construction has many caveats to it including approvals or denials by the land-owners for any kinds of barriers. Further, there is an historic church and a butterfly sanctuary that is restricted from any barrier construction.

3. There is NO money for an additional 750 Border Patrol agents and there is NO money for 2000 more ICE agents.

4. Any construction of a border wall cannot use any of the prototypes offered to the Federal government.

5. The bill would prohibit DHS from detaining or deporting a sponsor, potential sponsor, or household member of an unaccompanied minor based on information shared with HHS. (this means that all unaccompanied themselves their own sanctuary).

6. Detention for up to 100,000 illegals would require other options including wearing ankle bracelets or simply using a phone. This means essentially detention centers could be rendered obsolete.

7. A larger or perhaps a separate oversight committee/team will be established to manage all ICE activities.

8. There is a cap to immigrant beds at 45,274.

Meanwhile, it seems while unaccompanied children and the agencies that deal with them have full amnesty. So, Trump is declaring a national emergency. What does that mean?

Making this declaration out of a ‘fake emergency’ as the democrats like to label it does give the democrats the precedent to do the same with regard to climate change and or gun violence.

In December of 2017, Trump signed an Executive Order.

 

On December 20, 2017, by Executive Order 13818, the President declared a national emergency with respect to serious human rights abuse and corruption around the world and, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), took related steps to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States.

The prevalence and severity of human rights abuse and corruption that have their source, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States, continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States.  For this reason, the national emergency declared on December 20, 2017, must continue in effect beyond December 20, 2018.  Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13818 with respect to serious human rights abuse and corruption.

*** When the President declares a national emergency, no powers or authorities made available by statute for use in the event of an emergency shall be exercised unless and until the President specifies the provisions of law under which he proposes that he, or other officers will act. Such specification may be made either in the declaration of a national emergency, or by one or more contemporaneous or subsequent Executive orders published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.

***

SUBCHAPTER IV—ACCOUNTABILITY AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS OF PRESIDENT

§1641. Accountability and reporting requirements of President

(a) Maintenance of file and index of Presidential orders, rules and regulations during national emergency

When the President declares a national emergency, or Congress declares war, the President shall be responsible for maintaining a file and index of all significant orders of the President, including Executive orders and proclamations, and each Executive agency shall maintain a file and index of all rules and regulations, issued during such emergency or war issued pursuant to such declarations.

(b) Presidential orders, rules and regulations; transmittal to Congress

All such significant orders of the President, including Executive orders, and such rules and regulations shall be transmitted to the Congress promptly under means to assure confidentiality where appropriate.

(c) Expenditures during national emergency; Presidential reports to Congress

When the President declares a national emergency or Congress declares war, the President shall transmit to Congress, within ninety days after the end of each six-month period after such declaration, a report on the total expenditures incurred by the United States Government during such six-month period which are directly attributable to the exercise of powers and authorities conferred by such declaration. Not later than ninety days after the termination of each such emergency or war, the President shall transmit a final report on all such expenditures.

(Pub. L. 94–412, title IV, §401, Sept. 14, 1976, 90 Stat. 1257.)

SUBCHAPTER V—APPLICATION TO POWERS AND AUTHORITIES OF OTHER PROVISIONS OF LAW AND ACTIONS TAKEN THEREUNDER

§1651. Other laws, powers and authorities conferred thereby, and actions taken thereunder; Congressional studies

(a) The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to the following provisions of law, the powers and authorities conferred thereby, and actions taken thereunder:

(1) Chapters 1 to 11 of title 40 and division C (except sections 3302, 3307(e), 3501(b), 3509, 3906, 4710, and 4711) of subtitle I of title 41;

(2) Section 3727(a)–(e)(1) of title 31;

(3) Section 6305 of title 41;

(4) Public Law 85–804 (Act of Aug. 28, 1958, 72 Stat. 972; 50 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.);

(5) Section 2304(a)(1) 1 of title 10; 2


(b) Each committee of the House of Representatives and the Senate having jurisdiction with respect to any provision of law referred to in subsection (a) of this section shall make a complete study and investigation concerning that provision of law and make a report, including any recommendations and proposed revisions such committee may have, to its respective House of Congress within two hundred and seventy days after September 14, 1976.

(Pub. L. 94–412, title V, §502, Sept. 14, 1976, 90 Stat. 1258; Pub. L. 95–223, title I, §101(d), Dec. 28, 1977, 91 Stat. 1625; Pub. L. 96–513, title V, §507(b), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2919; Pub. L. 105–362, title IX, §901(r)(2), Nov. 10, 1998, 112 Stat. 3291; Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title X, §1062(o)(1), Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2652.)

*** Given the text of this Executive Order as case can be made that it applies to the crisis at the Southern border. The president does have the power and authority to amend that order or to annex it to be more exact to include the matter specifically at the border and other areas including visa overstays, a port of entry emergency due to fentanyl and other opioids, where 70,000 people a year die from overdoses.

Frankly, Trump should order an increase in funding to DEA to aid Border Patrol and ICE and install narco-training and drug use education in all public schools and universities.

Data Proves Chicago Most Corrupt City

Posted on by

Not like we did not already know that but actually it is worse than you think. This report comes from the University of Illinois at Chicago….ruh roh. Remember that Chicago and Los Angeles mayors are Democrats….oh yeah….Barack Obama lists Chicago as his hometown…but he never really goes there and there is corruption all over his presidential library too.

Chicago alderman convicted of corruption - Chicago Tribune

With matters like the conspiracy of the Olympics in Chicago and the whole Tony Rezko thing…the beat goes on…..

Oh yeah, just for fun, you may want to read up on Operation Greylord,  corruption in the Cook County judicial system…..

Along with Chicago, Los Angeles topped the list of the most public corruption convictions in America, based on the number of federal corruption convictions between 1976 and 2017. Chicago had 1,731 convictions during that time period, while the Central District of California had 1,534. The Manhattan area had 1,327 and Miami had 1,165, according to the report. Washington, D.C. had 1,159.

Drawing information from the Department of Justice, the report shows 25 public figures were convicted of charges tied to corruption in 2017 in the City of Chicago and the northern third of Illinois. 2017 was the most recent year for which the DOJ data was available, the report says.

More than 30 Chicago City Council members have been tied to corruption cases since the 1970’s, with Ald. Edward Burke (14th) becoming the latest Chicago politician to make headlines after being charged with one count of attempted extortion on Thursday, Jan. 3 for allegedly trying to use his power on the City Council to solicit business for his private law firm.

The charge against Burke, Chicago’s most powerful and longest-running City Council member, comes on the heels of two FBI raids carried out in his offices late last year. After serving the city’s Southwest Side for 50 years, the charge puts Burke on the ever-growing list of disgraced city officials.

Although Chicago accounts for 82 percent of the state’s public corruption convictions, according to the report, federal corruption is a statewide problem.

Statewide, Illinois ranked–on a per capita basis–as the third most corrupt state in America. In 2017, the state had 34 convictions for public corruption.

California, Florida, New York and Texas all had more public convictions than Illinois, but those states have much larger populations so they ranked lower on a per capita basis.

***

In a February 5th, 2018, an article in the New York Times, the newspaper included Chicago among “Four of America’s largest cities (that) are under the dark clouds of major federal corruption investigations. Residents, politicians, and power brokers in all of them are holding their breath, waiting for signs of how deeply their civic cultures will be shaken.” The Times article, written by Richard Fausset, Monica Davey and Tim Arango, states that the investigations in Atlanta, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Philadelphia raise questions about “whether there can be any lasting cure for the chronic corruption.

Read the report(s) here.

 

Gov. Newsom Stops California High Speed Rail

Posted on by

It started in 2008, where the Republicans were against it but the Democrats were for it.

California high-speed rail: A train to nowhere without a ...

The whole project was underway and President Obama ponied up Federal dollars for the project, like $3.8 billion which Governor Newsom refuses to pay back to ‘Donald Trump’. Hummm, it is not President Trump’s money, it belongs to the U.S. taxpayer. Hello…border wall?


It is important to note that the California Governor canceled the high speed rail over the voters of California under Proposition 1A.

The whole mess from the beginning was full of corruption and much of that fraud sits on the desk of California Attorney General Becerra. Swell….

Remember, the first Federal installment occurred under the Obama regime with a $2.5 billion investment under that pesky American Recovery and Reinvestment Act….$2.5 billion to be exact.

But after spending $3 billion of the fed’s money and $7.8 billion from California bond sales and revenue from the state’s infamous cap-and-trade taxes, Cal HSR has failed to lay a mile of track over the initial 32-mile section of flat San Joaquin Valley farmland.

Rather than demand the money back from Tutor-Perini/Zachry/Parsons, its project and construction manager (PCM), Cal HSR recently voted to extend the term of the contract by 6 months and to raise the price from $34.2 million to $40.2 million, an 18 percent bump.

The move is even more extraordinary given that Cal HSR admits that the professional service contract was “based on qualifications of PCM and its 25 staffing resources, as opposed to low bid.” That means Tutor-Perini/Zachry/Parsons employees, even if they worked exclusively on Cal HSR, are each being paid an average of $240,000 for the next six months of work.

Cal HSR told the Fresno Bee that the delays were due to extended environmental impact reviews and the protracted pace of acquiring 822 parcels of mostly farmland, either through negotiated purchase or suing under eminent domain.  More details here.

The KetchUp: California High Speed Rail Moving Along | SouthLA

With a price tag so far of $77 billion, Governor Newsom is somewhat equivocating on the whole thing. Seems there is no plan on paper or a timetable. Further, there are all kinds of lawsuits when it comes to environmental impact, evaluations and where if any, a rail system would continue in that state. California with the funding of the high speed rail also committed at the same time to electrifying commuter lines from San Jose to San Francisco as well as modernizing community development and station planning. This is a state that has a major homeless problem not to mention housing issues mostly due to land use restrictions and Silicon Valley employment.