Category Archives: NY Times

Trump Russian ties fake news report reported by BuzzFeed and CNN exposed by NY Times, “unsubstantiated information from anonymous sources”, “dossier prepared by a former British intelligence officer hired by Mr. Trump’s political opponents”

Trump Russian ties fake news report reported by BuzzFeed and CNN exposed by NY Times, “unsubstantiated information from anonymous sources”, “dossier prepared by a former British intelligence officer hired by Mr. Trump’s political opponents”

“Intelligence agencies should never have allowed this fake news to “leak” into the public. One last shot at me.Are we living in Nazi Germany?”…Donald Trump

“Hillary Clinton has stated multiple times, falsely, that 17 U.S. intelligence agencies had assessed that Russia was the source of our publications. That’s false—we can say that the Russian government is not the source,”…Julian Assange

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

From the NY Times January 10, 2017.

“BuzzFeed Posts Unverified Claims on Trump, Stirring Debate

BuzzFeed News became the center of a swirling debate over journalistic ethics on Tuesday after its decision to publish a 35-page document carrying explosive, but unverified, allegations about ties between the Russian government and President-elect Donald J. Trump.

The document, a dossier prepared by a former British intelligence officer hired by Mr. Trump’s political opponents, had been circulating among high-ranking politicians and some journalists since the fall. Intelligence officials recently presented a two-page summary of the allegations to Mr. Trump and President Obama, CNN reported on Tuesday.

But CNN declined to include the specific allegations contained in the dossier — such as collusion between Mr. Trump’s team and Russian operatives — saying that its journalists could not independently verify them.

Roughly an hour later, BuzzFeed, in a break from typical journalistic practice, posted the document that fully detailed the unverified allegations to which CNN had alluded.

“BuzzFeed News is publishing the full document so that Americans can make up their own minds about allegations about the president-elect that have circulated at the highest levels of the US government,” BuzzFeed wrote.

Ben Smith, BuzzFeed’s editor in chief, declined to comment beyond the article, which carried the bylines of three BuzzFeed reporters. But in a memo to his staff, Mr. Smith offered a further explanation about why the site had published the document.

“Our presumption is to be transparent in our journalism and to share what we have with our readers,” Mr. Smith wrote. “We have always erred on the side of publishing. In this case, the document was in wide circulation at the highest levels of American government and media.

“Publishing this document was not an easy or simple call, and people of good will may disagree with our choice,” Mr. Smith added. “But publishing this dossier reflects how we see the job of reporters in 2017.”

The reports by CNN and Buzzfeed sent other news organizations, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, scrambling to publish their own articles, some of which included generalized descriptions of the unverified allegations about Mr. Trump. By late Tuesday, though, only BuzzFeed had published the full document.

BuzzFeed’s decision, besides its immediate political ramifications for a president-elect who is to be inaugurated in 10 days, was sure to accelerate a roiling debate about the role and credibility of the traditional media in today’s frenetic, polarized information age.

Of particular interest was the use of unsubstantiated information from anonymous sources, a practice that fueled some of the so-called fake news — false rumors passed off as legitimate journalism — that proliferated during the presidential election.”

“In a brief interview in the Times newsroom on Tuesday evening, Dean Baquet, the executive editor of The Times, said the paper would not publish the document because the allegations were “totally unsubstantiated.”

“We, like others, investigated the allegations and haven’t corroborated them, and we felt we’re not in the business of publishing things we can’t stand by,” Mr. Baquet said.”

Read more:

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

NY Times: How Hillary Clinton grappled with Bill Clinton’s infidelity and his accusers, Wicked Leaks will reveal truth, Hillary terrorist using violence threats or intimidation to achieve a political aim, Clintons victims cowering in fear

NY Times: How Hillary Clinton grappled with Bill Clinton’s infidelity and his accusers, Wicked Leaks will reveal truth, Hillary terrorist using violence threats or intimidation to achieve a political aim, Clintons victims cowering in fear

“Broaddrick herself told NewsMax.com last year that her home had been broken into, her pets released and her answering machine tape stolen while she and her husband were away briefly during the House impeachment probe.
“Let me tell you something. They were all over that woman,” Schippers told NewsMax.com. “And it was the type of stuff we ran into with the outfit (the Chicago mob). Intimidation just by watching her, making their presence known. … Just to let her know ‘We can do what we want.’ ””…David Schippers

“The Clintons’ “systematically abuse women and others – sexually, physically, and psychologically – in their scramble for power and wealth,” says the book’s press release.”…”The Clintons’ War on Women”

“The devil’s in that woman.”…Miss Emma, Clinton’s cook, governor’s mansion

 

Wicked Leaks.

A new Citizen Wells initiative, which like Wiki Leaks will bring to the light information hidden from the public.

Most of the information revealed by Citizen Wells has been scrubbed or diminished in search engines.

Other articles and facts have become topical again and deserve to be read by a new audience of younger people and others now using the internet.

It is fitting and proper that a new NY Times article, covering for Hillary and obfuscating the truth, be highlighted in this introduction.

I will be presenting a small portion of the article at this time to prevent mass nausea and blood pressure rises.

From the NY Times October 2, 2016.

“The enduring image of Mrs. Clinton from that campaign was a “60 Minutes” interview in which she told the country she was not blindly supporting her husband out of wifely duty. “I’m not sitting here, some little woman standing by my man like Tammy Wynette,” she said.

But stand by she did, holding any pain or doubts in check as the campaign battled to keep the Clintons’ political aspirations alive.

Last week, Donald J. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee,criticized Mrs. Clinton over Mr. Clinton’s affairs and her response to them, and said he might talk more about the issue in the final weeks before the election.

That could be a treacherous strategy for Mr. Trump, given his own past infidelity and questionable treatment of women. Many voters, particularly women, might see Mrs. Clinton being blamed for her husband’s conduct.

It could also remind voters of a searing period in American history, and in Mrs. Clinton’s life.

Confronting a spouse’s unfaithfulness is painful under any circumstance. For Mrs. Clinton, it happened repeatedly and in the most public of ways, unfolding at the dawn of the 24/7 news cycle, and later in impeachment proceedings that convulsed the nation.

Outwardly, she remained stoic and defiant, defending her husband while a progression of women and well-funded conservative operatives accused Mr. Clinton of behavior unbecoming the leader of the free world.

But privately, she embraced the Clinton campaign’s aggressive strategy of counterattack: Women who claimed to have had sexual encounters with Mr. Clinton would become targets of digging and discrediting — tactics that women’s rights advocates frequently denounce.”

“Mrs. Clinton’s level of involvement in that effort, as described in interviews, internal campaign records and archives, is still the subject of debate. By some accounts, she gave the green light and was a motivating force; by others, her support was no more than tacit assent.”

Dolly Kyle Browning has known the Clintons for decades.

“Aaron, Hillary is an enabler is about the nicest thing you can say about her,” stated Kyle when asked about a statement last Friday from Donald Trump, who slammed Hillary Clinton as an “unbelievably nasty, mean enabler” who “destroyed” the lives of her husband’s mistresses and alleged victims.

Continued Kyle: “The fact of the matter is Hillary is a terrorist. I invite you to look up the definition of terrorism. It is the use of violence, threats, or intimidation to achieve a political aim. … That’s what terrorism is. It changes people’s lives by changing their decisions about what they would otherwise do. And these women who might otherwise speak up are so afraid that they won’t say anything.”

Kyle alleged that there are many other Clinton lovers and purported assault victims who would likely speak out, but who instead “are cowering in fear because of the terrorism.”

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/15/exclusive-clintons-alleged-ex-lover-hillary-terrorist-sex-addict-bill-told-2000-women/

From Dolly Kyle Browning, et al vs William Jefferson Clinton.

“Plaintiff Dolly Kyle Browning has been intentionally and maliciously threatened by Clinton and his agents, including Lindsey. See id. at ¶¶ 131-33. They threatened to “destroy” her if she told the media about her sexual relationship with Clinton. See id. at ¶ 131. They also warned her not to publish her book, Purposes of the Heart, which depicts that 30-year relationship. See id. In addition, Clinton, acting through Lindsey, threatened and intimidated Mrs. Browning into severely limiting her public statements about her relationship with Clinton. Id.

Most significant to the instant motion, Clinton and Lindsey also knowingly used threats and intimidation to prevent Mrs. Browning from testifying in the Paula Jones civil rights/sexual harassment lawsuit (“the Jones case”). They directed Clinton’s lawyers to draft a motion to quash her deposition subpoena, and pressured Mrs. Browning to file it with the court. See id. at ¶¶ 61-64. Mrs. Browning, a member of the Texas Bar and officer of the court, refused to comply, and was deposed in the Jones case on October 28, 1997. See id. at ¶¶ 2, 64-65. Clinton and his agents then followed through on their threats against Mrs. Browning. Among other things, they defamed her, publicly branding her a liar out to “get” the President, and knowingly circulating false and derogatory information about her character and motivations.See, e.g., id. at ¶¶ 67, 69, 71-74, 79-81.

Remarkably similar threatening tactics have been directed at other women who, like Mrs. Browning, have personal knowledge of Clinton’s misconduct and were sought as witnesses in official proceedings against Clinton. See id. at ¶ 134. Plaintiffs referred in their Amended Complaint to the threats and retaliation by Clinton and his agents against Kathleen Willey and Linda Tripp when they were called to testify in the Jones case and the Independent Counsel’s investigation of the Lewinsky affair. Indeed, the number of women who have suffered from these “Clintonian” tactics is significant. On March 11, 1999,Investor’s Business Daily reported that at least nine (9) women have now charged that Clinton “personally assaulted them or, through his ‘agents’ or ‘people,’ threatened to do them or their families physical harm.” The list includes Dolly Kyle Browning, Gennifer Flowers, Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Corbin Jones, Kathleen Willey, Monica Lewinsky, Linda Tripp, Sally Perdue, and Elizabeth Ward Gracen. “And all of them say they’re afraid for their safety so long as he remains in power.”

Because of the threats, intimidation, and retaliation directed at these women, their fear for their safety, and the enormous power and means available to Clinton and Lindsey, Plaintiffs must perpetuate the testimony of these women without delay. Their testimony will substantiate Plaintiffs’ RICO allegations, and is both competent and highly relevant to Plaintiffs’ case. As RICO witnesses against the highest officials in our government, these women are at enormous risk. Every moment of delay provides Clinton and Lindsey with additional opportunities to threaten them and/or their families, and enhances the chances that their testimony will be lost forever. Plaintiffs cannot obtain the testimony of these witnesses through the ordinary course of discovery in this case as all discovery has been stayed pending the Court’s ruling on the outstanding motions to dismiss. Plaintiffs therefore respectfully move the Court for leave to perpetuate the testimony of these witnesses or, in the alternative, to commence limited discovery to take their depositions.”

Browning Vs Clinton, Plaintiff’s expedited motion for leave to perpetuate testimony of threatened witnesses, Case No. 98-1991, Gennifer Flowers, Juanita Broaddrick, Linda Tripp, Monica Lewinsky, Paula Jones, Elizabeth Gracen, Kathleen Willey, Julie Steele, Sally Perdue

There is much much more information available to respond to this article and the Clintons’ evil and corrupt past.

Just as with Wiki Leaks, much has been revealed and much more is to come.

Wicked Leaks.

Revealing the Clintons’ evil and corrupt past.

Most of the scrubbed articles resurrected can be viewed here.

http://citizenwells.net/

Disclaimer: The use of the words wicked leaks is not tied to or a reference to the book “Wicked Leaks” by Matt Bendoris.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

 

 

 

 

 

 

NY Times deal with devil, Times endorses Hillary Clinton, Bob Herbert 2001 Democratic Party … made a pact with Mr. Clinton that was the equivalent of a pact with the devil, Lost its bearings and maybe even its soul, “The devil’s in that woman.”

NY Times deal with devil, Times endorses Hillary Clinton, Bob Herbert 2001 Democratic Party … made a pact with Mr. Clinton that was the equivalent of a pact with the devil, Lost its bearings and maybe even its soul, “The devil’s in that woman.”

“Millions of cretinous and amoral Americans still admire Bill and Hillary Clinton, the two foulest amoral slimebags that have ever besmirched the White House. These two foulmouthed and lying psychopaths have been, and still are, blindly supported by masses of non-clinical morons, diehard Democrats, and whorish liberal journalists and their editors.

The Clintons’ habitual lies, gutter language, anti-Semitic outbursts, and anti-black slurs have been documented by reliable writers but have been — and still are — routinely suppressed by the so-called liberal media.”…Reinhold Aman, Ph.D.

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”…Ephesians 6:12

“The devil’s in that woman.”…Miss Emma, Clinton’s cook, governor’s mansion

 

The NY Times has made a deal with the devil and endorsed Hillary Clinton.

“Running down the other guy won’t suffice to make that argument. The best case for Hillary Clinton cannot be, and is not, that she isn’t Donald Trump.

The best case is, instead, about the challenges this country faces, and Mrs. Clinton’s capacity to rise to them.

The next president will take office with bigoted, tribalist movements and their leaders on the march. In the Middle East and across Asia, in Russia and Eastern Europe, even in Britain and the United States, war, terrorism and the pressures of globalization are eroding democratic values, fraying alliances and challenging the ideals of tolerance and charity.

The 2016 campaign has brought to the surface the despair and rage of poor and middle-class Americans who say their government has done little to ease the burdens that recession, technological change, foreign competition and war have heaped on their families.

Over 40 years in public life, Hillary Clinton has studied these forces and weighed responses to these problems. Our endorsement is rooted in respect for her intellect, experience, toughness and courage over a career of almost continuous public service, often as the first or only woman in the arena.

Mrs. Clinton’s work has been defined more by incremental successes than by moments of transformational change. As a candidate, she has struggled to step back from a pointillist collection of policy proposals to reveal the full pattern of her record. That is a weakness of her campaign, and a perplexing one, for the pattern is clear. It shows a determined leader intent on creating opportunity for struggling Americans at a time of economic upheaval and on ensuring that the United States remains a force for good in an often brutal world.

Similarly, Mrs. Clinton’s occasional missteps, combined with attacks on her trustworthiness, have distorted perceptions of her character. She is one of the most tenacious politicians of her generation, whose willingness to study and correct course is rare in an age of unyielding partisanship. As first lady, she rebounded from professional setbacks and personal trials with astounding resilience. Over eight years in the Senate and four as secretary of state, she built a reputation for grit and bipartisan collaboration. She displayed a command of policy and diplomatic nuance and an ability to listen to constituents and colleagues that are all too exceptional in Washington.

Mrs. Clinton’s record of service to children, women and families has spanned her adult life. One of her boldest acts as first lady was her 1995 speech in Beijing declaring that women’s rights are human rights. After a failed attempt to overhaul the nation’s health care system, she threw her support behind legislation to establish the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which now covers more than eight million lower-income young people. This year, she rallied mothers of gun-violence victims to join her in demanding comprehensive background checks for gun buyers and tighter reins on gun sales.”

“As secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton was charged with repairing American credibility after eight years of the Bush administration’s unilateralism. She bears a share of the responsibility for the Obama administration’s foreign-policy failings, notably in Libya. But her achievements are substantial. She led efforts to strengthen sanctions against Iran, which eventually pushed it to the table for talks over its nuclear program, and in 2012, she helped negotiate a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas.

Mrs. Clinton led efforts to renew diplomatic relations with Myanmar, persuading its junta to adopt political reforms. She helped promote the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an important trade counterweight to China and a key component of the Obama administration’s pivot to Asia. Her election-year reversal on that pact has confused some of her supporters, but her underlying commitment to bolstering trade along with workers’ rights is not in doubt. Mrs. Clinton’s attempt to reset relations with Russia, though far from successful, was a sensible effort to improve interactions with a rivalrous nuclear power.

Mrs. Clinton has shown herself to be a realist who believes America cannot simply withdraw behind oceans and walls, but must engage confidently in the world to protect its interests and be true to its values, which include helping others escape poverty and oppression.

Mrs. Clinton’s husband, Bill Clinton, governed during what now looks like an optimistic and even gentle era. The end of the Cold War and the advance of technology and trade appeared to be awakening the world’s possibilities rather than its demons. Many in the news media, and in the country, and in that administration, were distracted by the scandal du jour — Mr. Clinton’s impeachment — during the very period in which a terrorist threat was growing. We are now living in a world darkened by the realization of that threat and its many consequences.”

“Through war and recession, Americans born since 9/11 have had to grow up fast, and they deserve a grown-up president. A lifetime’s commitment to solving problems in the real world qualifies Hillary Clinton for this job, and the country should put her to work.”

Read more if you can stomach it.

“The devil’s in that woman.”

From NewsMax March 22, 2001 via Citizen News.

“Falwell said he thought ex-first lady Hillary Clinton was a prime mover behind much of the corruption that permeated the White House during her husband’s tenure.

“You know, Hillary – it’s amazing to me, she not only knew about all these things, Bill Clinton didn’t really have the time to do all those mean things because he would have interrupted his love affairs,” Falwell said.

“I think that it was Hillary all the way. I think that she’s the mean-spirited one. She’s the ideologue, she’s the flaming left-wing socialist liberal. She’s a bad person with a criminal mind.”

The former Moral Majority chief said it was his personal belief that Mrs. Clinton will stay married to her husband only as long as the relationship furthers her own political ambitions.”

Hillary has Criminal Mind, Clinton Scandals Need Probing, Jerry Falwell Newsmax March 22, 2001, “I think that it was Hillary all the way. I think that she’s the mean spirited one. She’s the ideologue, she’s the flaming left wing socialist liberal. She’s a bad person with a criminal mind.”

From NewsMax February 26, 2001 via Citizen News.

“New York Times Left-Winger: Shun Corrupt Clinton

Bob Herbert, identified today by Fox News Channel as the most liberal columnist at the New York Times, is belatedly joining in on the anti-Clinton bandwagon. But his vehemence is making up for his tardiness.

Herbert writes today that the Democratic Party made “the equivalent of a pact with the devil” in supporting Clinton and “in the process it lost its bearings and maybe even its soul.”

“Now, with the stench of yet another scandal polluting the political atmosphere, some of Mr. Clinton’s closest associates and supporters are acknowledging what his enemies have argued for years – the man is so thoroughly corrupt it’s frightening.”

“The Clintons may or may not be led away in handcuffs someday. But whatever happens with the criminal investigations, it’s time for the Democratic Party to wise up. Ostracism would be a good first step. Bill Clinton should be cut completely loose.”

Democratic Party made “the equivalent of a pact with the devil” in supporting Clinton and “in the process it lost its bearings and maybe even its soul”, NewsMax article February 26, 2001, Bob Herbert NY Times

Hillary’s accomplishments.

  1. Hillary enabled Bill in Rapegate which led to the White House and country’s distraction and arguably led to the 9/11 attacks.
  2. Hillary engineered the Commercegate selling of seats in exhange for campaign contributions. This also led to the death of Ron Brown.
  3. ISIS formed and grew under the Obama/Hillary watch.
  4. Benghazi.
  5. The further collapse and subsequent emigration in Syria happened on the Obama/Hillary watch.

The above are perhaps the top 5 Hillary “accomplishments.”

There are plenty more.

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Judith Miller admits her role in WMD reports, No senior official spoon fed me a line about WMD, George Bush did not lie, Bush and senior officials cited intelligence community’s incorrect conclusions, “The Story: A Reporter’s Journey,”

Judith Miller admits her role in WMD reports, No senior official spoon fed me a line about WMD, George Bush did not lie, Bush and senior officials cited intelligence community’s incorrect conclusions, “The Story: A Reporter’s Journey,”

“If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world but I am sure we would be getting reports from hell before breakfast.”… William Tecumseh Sherman

“The (American) press, which is mostly controlled by vested
interests, has an excessive influence on public opinion.”… Albert Einstein

“The function of the press is very high. It is almost Holy.
It ought to serve as a forum for the people, through which
the people may know freely what is going on. To misstate or
suppress the news is a breach of trust.”
…. Louis D. Brandeis

 

 

From the Wall Street Journal April 3, 2015.

“The Iraq War and Stubborn Myths
Officials didn’t lie, and I wasn’t fed a line, writes Judith Miller”

“I took America to war in Iraq. It was all me.

OK, I had some help from a duplicitous vice president, Dick Cheney. Then there was George W. Bush, a gullible president who could barely locate Iraq on a map and who wanted to avenge his father and enrich his friends in the oil business. And don’t forget the neoconservatives in the White House and the Pentagon who fed cherry-picked intelligence about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, or WMD, to reporters like me.

None of these assertions happens to be true, though all were published and continue to have believers. This is not how wars come about, and it is surely not how the war in Iraq occurred. Nor is it what I did as a reporter for the New York Times. These false narratives deserve, at last, to be retired.

There was no shortage of mistakes about Iraq, and I made my share of them. The newsworthy claims of some of my prewar WMD stories were wrong. But so is the enduring, pernicious accusation that the Bush administration fabricated WMD intelligence to take the country to war. Before the 2003 invasion, President Bush and other senior officials cited the intelligence community’s incorrect conclusions about Saddam’s WMD capabilities and, on occasion, went beyond them. But relying on the mistakes of others and errors of judgment are not the same as lying.

I have never met George W. Bush. I never discussed the war with Dick Cheney until the winter of 2012, years after he had left office and I had left the Times. I wish I could have interviewed senior officials before the war about the role that WMDs played in the decision to invade Iraq. The White House’s passion for secrecy and aversion to the media made that unlikely. Less senior officials were of help as sources, but they didn’t make the decisions.

No senior official spoon-fed me a line about WMD. That would have been so much easier than uncovering classified information that officials can be jailed for disclosing. My sources were the same counterterrorism, arms-control and Middle East analysts on whom I had relied for my stories about Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda’s growing threat to America—a series published eight months before 9/11 for which the Times staff, including me, won a Pulitzer.”

“The CIA repeatedly assured President Bush that Saddam Hussein still had WMD. Foreign intelligence agencies, even those whose nations opposed war, shared this view. And so did Congress. Over the previous 15 years, noted Stuart Cohen, the former vice chairman of the National Intelligence Council, none of the congressional committees routinely briefed on Iraqi WMD assessments expressed concern about bias or error.”

Read more:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-iraq-war-and-stubborn-myths-1428087215

 

Janet Yellen employment concerns, NY Times protects Obama, Chicago Suntimes Philadelphia Fed and Duke Fuqua School of Business blame Obamacare for unemployment and part time jobs

Janet Yellen employment concerns, NY Times protects Obama, Chicago Suntimes Philadelphia Fed and Duke Fuqua School of Business blame Obamacare for unemployment and part time jobs

“Over the last six months, of the net job creation, 97 percent of that is part-time work,”…Keith Hall, former BLS chief

“Nearly half of U.S. companies are reluctant to hire full-time employees because of the ACA. One in five firms indicates they are likely to hire fewer employees, and another one in 10 may lay off current employees in response to the law.

Other firms will shift toward part-time workers. More than 40 percent of CFOs say their companies will consider switching some jobs to less than 30 hours per week or targeting part-time workers for future employment.”…Duke University Fuqua School of Business December 11, 2013

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

Janet Yellen, despite the fact she has tap danced around the real employment problems in this county, today in Jackson Hole did address some of the problems with employment in this country.

“Consider first the behavior of the labor force participation rate, which has declined substantially since the end of the recession even as the unemployment rate has fallen. As a consequence, the employment-to-population ratio has increased far less over the past several years than the unemployment rate alone would indicate, based on past experience. For policymakers, the key question is: What portion of the decline in labor force participation reflects structural shifts and what portion reflects cyclical weakness in the labor market? If the cyclical component is abnormally large, relative to the unemployment rate, then it might be seen as an additional contributor to labor market slack.

Labor force participation peaked in early 2000, so its decline began well before the Great Recession. A portion of that decline clearly relates to the aging of the baby boom generation. But the pace of decline accelerated with the recession. As an accounting matter, the drop in the participation rate since 2008 can be attributed to increases in four factors: retirement, disability, school enrollment, and other reasons, including worker discouragement.8 Of these, greater worker discouragement is most directly the result of a weak labor market, so we could reasonably expect further increases in labor demand to pull a sizable share of discouraged workers back into the workforce.”

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/yellen20140822a.htm

The NY Times, as it often has, reports on the Yellen speech and quotes one of the most ludicrous papers as an excuse for the lack of employment.

I was just going to pull up the NY Times Yellen article from this afternoon and got this message:

“The requested URL “http://www.nytimes.com/” cannot be found or is not available. Please check the spelling or try again later.”

I will try again later.

***  Update 7:03 PM article back up ***

“Ms. Yellen’s optimism that Fed policy can increase employment and wages is also challenged by a growing body of economic literature purporting to show that the decline of employment is caused largely by factors that predate the recession, and that cannot be addressed by continuing to hold down interest rates.

The economists Stephen J. Davis, of the University of Chicago, and John Haltiwanger, of the University of Maryland, argued in a paper presented Friday at the conference that employment had declined because the labor market has stagnated in recent decades. Fewer people are leaving or losing jobs, and fewer are taking new ones.

“These results,” they wrote, “suggest the U.S. economy faced serious impediments to high employment rates well before the Great Recession, and that sustained high employment is unlikely to return without restoring labor market fluidity.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/23/business/yellen-on-federal-reserve-policy.html

Read the rest of the article.

You will be amazed.

 

From the Duke University Fuqua School of Business, December 11, 2013.

“——————————————-
DUKE UNIVERSITY NEWS
Duke University Office of News & Communications

http://www.dukenews.duke.edu

——————————————-

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2013
CONTACTS: Kevin Anselmo (Duke’s Fuqua School of Business)
(919) 660-7722
kevin.anselmo@duke.edu
or
David W. Owens (CFO Magazine)
(617) 790-3000
davidowens@cfo.com

CFO SURVEY: AFFORDABLE CARE ACT COULD CURTAIL HIRING

Note to editors: For additional comment, see contact information at the end of this release.
Watch professor John Graham discuss the results (or use this link
http://youtu.be/F4oj8d5F9Jo). You may also post this video on your website. Names of CFOs who took part in the survey and agreed to speak with media are available by request.

DURHAM, N.C. — A significant percentage of U.S. chief financial officers indicate that because of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), they may reduce employment growth at their firms and shift toward part-time workers.

A majority of finance chiefs also believe the full Social Security retirement age should be raised to help close the budget shortfall.

Despite these issues, underlying economic conditions are expected to improve in 2014 and, except in Europe, corporate charitable giving remains strong

These are some of the findings from the latest Duke University/CFO Magazine Global Business Outlook Survey, which concluded Dec. 5. The survey has been conducted for 71 consecutive quarters and spans the globe, making it the world’s longest running and most comprehensive research on senior finance executives. Presented results are for U.S. firms unless otherwise noted.

EMPLOYMENT EFFECTS OF THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT

Nearly half of U.S. companies are reluctant to hire full-time employees because of the ACA.
One in five firms indicates they are likely to hire fewer employees, and another one in 10 may lay off current employees in response to the law.

Other firms will shift toward part-time workers. More than 40 percent of CFOs say their companies will consider switching some jobs to less than 30 hours per week or targeting part-time workers for future employment.”

Read more:

http://www.cfosurvey.org/14q1/PressRelease.pdf

From the Philadelphia Fed August 2014.

“In special questions this month, firms were asked qualitative questions about the effects of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and how, if at all, they are making changes to their employment and compensation, including benefits (see Special Questions). Over 18 percent of the firms indicated that the number of workers they employ was lower because of the ACA; 3 percent indicated higher levels. The same percentage (18 percent) indicated that the proportion of part-time workers had increased. Regarding health insurance benefit coverage, 41 percent said their coverage was unchanged, but 52 percent indicated modifications to their offerings. Among those modifying their health insurance coverage, higher deductibles (91 percent), higher worker contributed premiums (88 percent), and higher out-of-pocket maximums (77 percent) were the most cited changes.”

From the Chicago SunTimes August 21, 2014.

“Thanks a lot, Obama.

Add the Affordable Care Act – or, specifically, the big-business Cubs’ response to it – to the causes behind Tuesday night’s tarp fiasco and rare successful protest by the San Francisco Giants.

The staffing issues that hamstrung the grounds crew Tuesday during a mad dash with the tarp under a sudden rainstorm were created in part by a wide-ranging reorganization last winter of game-day personnel, job descriptions and work limits designed to keep the seasonal workers – including much of the grounds crew – under 130 hours per month, according to numerous sources with direct knowledge.

That’s the full-time worker definition under “Obamacare,” which requires employer-provided healthcare benefits for “big businesses” such as a major league team.”

Read more:

http://www.suntimes.com/29402267-761/cubs-cut-grounds-crews-hours-to-avoid-paying-health-benefits-sources.html#.U_fDd_nxrVr

 

 

Obama exposed in NC in print, October 25, 2012, Rhino Times, Obama lies on Benghazi, Romney debate performance, US economy, Israel, Liberal mainstream media having hissy fit

Obama exposed in NC in print, October 25, 2012, Rhino Times, Obama lies on Benghazi, Romney debate performance, US economy, Israel, Liberal mainstream media having hissy fit

“We tried our plan—and it worked. That’s the difference. That’s the choice in this election. That’s why I’m running for a second term.”…Barack Obama

“The function of the press is very high. It is almost Holy.
It ought to serve as a forum for the people, through which
the people may know freely what is going on. To misstate or
suppress the news is a breach of trust.”…. Louis D. Brandeis

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

From John Hammer of the Rhino Times, in print in NC, October 25, 2012.

“But technology has its downside as well, and President Barack Hussein Obama is learning about the problems with electronic communication. The problem is that people can go back and find the records.

Obama tried to blame the whole Benghazi confusion on the State Department and the intelligence community. It simply was not believable that during and after the attack the State Department and the intelligence community believed that the attack was the result of a spontaneous demonstration. Four people were killed in the attack but everyone else survived, plus there were the surveillance videos.

Obama clearly was doing his best to push this entire controversy past Nov. 6 because after Nov. 6 it won’t matter whether he got an email from Ambassador Chris Stevens the day before the attack demanding more security, or a text message during the attack describing the well-organized planned attack that was taking place.

The truth is that Obama knew that it was an organized planned attack, but it doesn’t fit in with the worldview that he is trying to sell to the American people that the US has defeated al Qaeda and the world is a safer place because of President Obama. The truth didn’t fit in with his message, so he changed the story that he told to the American people and now he has been caught. It may change someone’s vote to know that the president deliberately misled the American people to better his chance of getting reelected.”

“The polls that the public sees just aren’t that good. Proof of that is that they still have North Carolina in the “leaning Romney” category. Barring some last minute surprise that will cause even hardcore Republicans to vote for Obama there is no way that Obama can win North Carolina. So any poll that doesn’t put North Carolina solidly in the Romney camp, and I haven’t seen one that does, is automatically suspect.”

“Judging from the campaigns, not only does Romney think he is ahead, Obama is convinced that Romney has won and is running around the country like a madman attacking Romney, trying to make something happen.

And Obama has to attack Romney; he has no other viable campaign. Obama can’t run on his record and he has a big problem if he presents a great plan to bring the country’s economy back around because then the question is, Why aren’t you doing this now? Why do you have to wait to get reelected?”

“One of the biggest lies of the debate was when Obama talked about Israel being “our greatest ally in the region.” Obama refused to even meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he was in the US this fall. Obama said it didn’t fit into his schedule, but during the same time he managed to find time for David Letterman and a lot of campaigning, which indicates his priorities.

Also, the White House has refused to say that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. Obama has been as rude to Netanyahu as one head of state can be to another, and now he is trying to say that he believes Israel is our closest ally. You simply don’t treat your friends the way Obama has treated Israel. As president he has never visited Israel.”

“But in the debate it certainly didn’t appear that Obama knew more about foreign affairs than Romney. In fact, Romney did what presidents often do and mentioned some obscure groups and movements that may be big news in national security briefings but haven’t made the daily newspapers. It made Romney seem like he was more knowledgeable.

Obama’s comment about horses and bayonets was just rude. It was a good idea, but the way he said it was rude and mean. No one doubts that Romney knows all about aircraft carriers and submarines. But Obama is a rude man. He is rude to our allies, rude to the people he should be working with in Congress, rude to his political opponents and rude to foreign heads of state who visit him in the White House.

Romney once again didn’t take the bait.

But Romney’s big advantage in this race is the economy. The question that people are going to be asking when they go into the polls is, “Am I better off than I was four years ago?” And for the vast majority of Americans the answer is no.

Not only did Obama allow Romney to talk about the economy, he got sucked in and started talking about it himself.”

“The liberal mainstream media are having a hissy fit right now. The liberal media have figured out that their candidate is not going to win and they are beside themselves. The attitude seems to be, how can the American people ignore all the horrible things they have written about Romney and vote for him?”

“The New York Times Sunday magazine did a hit job on Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan this week. It is amazing what they manage to weave into an article like it belongs. But the reporter, Mark Leibovich, seemed to dislike Sen. Rob Portman even more than Ryan.

Here’s one phrase about Portman, which is really interesting if you have a few facts: “One mark against the wealthy senator was that he might be perceived as too much of a Grey Poupon Republican …”

Here’s the problem. Portman is certainly wealthy, and he is a senator, but he is not a “wealthy senator.” He is kind of average by Senate standards. Portman doesn’t even make the list of the 50 wealthiest members of Congress. Portman, according to Roll Call, is worth about $6.72 million.”

“So of the top 10 richest members of Congress, three are Republicans and seven are Democrats. And Portman doesn’t make the top 50, yet The New York Times refers to him as a “wealthy senator.” How many times have you read – wealthy Sen. Dianne Feinstein, wealthy Sen. John Kerry, or wealthy Sen. Frank Lautenberg?”

“The article is an incredible piece of liberal Democrat propaganda, but very smoothly done. It makes it sound like offering someone barbecue sauce is a bad thing. The tone is really incredible.”

Read more:

http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/Articles-Columns-c-2012-10-24-213602.112113-Under-the-Hammer.html

John Hammer.

Excellent!

AOL buys Huffington Post, Citizen Wells to AOL, Clean up the act or close down business

AOL buys Huffington Post, Citizen Wells to AOL, Clean up the act or close down business

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

“Why has Obama endorsed the Huffington Post?”…Citizen Wells

From the NY Times February 7, 2011.

“The Huffington Post, which began in 2005 with a meager $1 million investment and has grown into one of the most heavily visited news Web sites in the country, is being acquired by AOL in a deal that creates an unlikely pairing of two online media giants.
The two companies completed the sale Sunday evening and announced the deal just after midnight on Monday. AOL will pay $315 million, $300 million of it in cash and the rest in stock. It will be the company’s largest acquisition since it was separated from Time Warner in 2009.

The deal will allow AOL to greatly expand its news gathering and original content creation, areas that its chief executive, Tim Armstrong, views as vital to reversing a decade-long decline.

Arianna Huffington, the cable talk show pundit, author and doyenne of the political left, will take control of all of AOL’s editorial content as president and editor in chief of a newly created Huffington Post Media Group. The arrangement will give her oversight not only of AOL’s national, local and financial news operations, but also of the company’s other media enterprises like MapQuest and Moviefone.

By handing so much control over to Ms. Huffington and making her a public face of the company, AOL, which has been seen as apolitical, risks losing its nonpartisan image. Ms. Huffington said her politics would have no bearing on how she ran the new business.

The deal has the potential to create an enterprise that could reach more than 100 million visitors in the United States each month. For The Huffington Post, which began as a liberal blog with a small staff but now draws some 25 million visitors every month, the sale represents an opportunity to reach new audiences. For AOL, which has been looking for ways to bring in new revenue as its dial-up Internet access business declines, the millions of Huffington Post readers represent millions in potential advertising dollars.

“This is a statement that the company is making investments, and in this case a bold investment, that fits right into our strategy,” Mr. Armstrong said in an interview Sunday. “I think this is going to be a situation where 1 plus 1 equals 11.”

Ms. Huffington and Mr. Armstrong began discussing the possibility of a sale only last month. They came to know each other well after they both attended a media conference in November and quickly discovered, as Ms. Huffington put it, “we were practically finishing each other’s sentences.” She added: “It was really amazing how aligned our visions were.”

One of The Huffington Post’s strengths has been creating an online community of readers with tens of millions of people. Their ability to leave comments on Huffington Post news articles and blog posts and to share them on Twitter and Facebook has been a major reason the site attracts so many readers. It is routine for articles to draw thousands of comments each and be cross-linked across multiple social networks.

Mr. Armstrong and Ms. Huffington say that AOL’s local news initiative, Patch, and its citizen journalist venture, Seed, stand to thrive when paired with the reader engagement tools of The Huffington Post.

AOL’s own news Web sites like Politics Daily and Daily Finance are likely to disappear when the deal is completed, and many of the writers who work for those sites will become Huffington Post writers, according to people with knowledge of the deal, who asked not to be identified discussing plans that are still being worked out.”

Read more: 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/07/business/media/07aol.html

I can assure you that AOL was not seen as apolitical by me.

From Citizen Wells to AOL. Either get rid of Arianna Huffington and clean up the Huffington Post  or we will shut you down.

Consider these “apolitical” examples from the Huffington Post.

Citizen Wells September 19, 2010.

“The Huffington Post, a mouthpiece and recipient of money from the Obama camp, came in first in the search  and reported the following:

 
“NBC News reports that the Army will court martial Lt. Col. Terry Lakin because of his refusal to deploy to Afghanistan. Lakin is part of the discredited “birther” movement, and as such believes that orders from President Obama are “illegal.”””

Read more:

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2010/09/19/lakin-court-martial-orwellian-lies-from-media-citizen-wells-challenge-open-thread-september-19-2010/

From Citizen Wells June 3, 2010.

“Here are some exerpts from the Huffington Post article. read the entire article and let me know what you think.”

“The information in this case is overwhelming — that is why I am shocked that Blagojevich is required to begin trial just a year and a half after his arrest. Keep in mind, his attorneys’ (led by the fabulous father-son team, both named Sam Adam) last big victory was the case of R & B singer, R. Kelly. In that case, the Adams had six, I repeat six, years to prepare for trial in a criminal case that hinged mainly on a single piece of evidence: a videotape.

Let me make this short and sweet: I am truly baffled that the defense was barred from so much and that the trial is going today. Here are some key points to keep in mind during the biggest circus in the nation…”

“At first, with much incredulity, I thought this had to be satire. I read it again. The author is apparently serious!

Correct me if I am wrong, but this appears to be an effort to discredit the prosecution of Rod Blagojevich and consequently Barack Obama.”

Read more:

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2010/06/03/blagojevich-trial-obama-camp-huffington-post-orwellian-efforts-to-defend-blagojevich-and-obama-obama-paid-bloggers-spread-disinformation-attempts-to-discreit-prosecution/

From Citizen Wells May 25, 2010.

“In 2008, the Obama Campaign used a great deal of money from undocumented donors, a legion of paid bloggers, internet thugs and a complicit press to spin their Orwellian lies. The Obama Campaign paid The Huffington Post $ 55,354 in 2008. That of course is what was reported to the FEC and  is the tip of the iceberg. I have heard Obama refer to The Huffington Post on several occasions. The last time was the last straw. The Citizen Wells blog has written about The Huffington Post acting as an arm of the Obama camp to smear opposition to Obama. You can expect more.

Listen to the following Obama speech, if you can stomach it. He mentions The Huffington Post at around 1 minute 57 seconds. The speech is cleverly (in the wicked sense) written. It mixes truths, half truths and lies.”