Archive | Diane Feinstein RSS feed for this section

After Clinton Cash comes Feinstein Financing

7 Jun
The US has entered into a contract with a real estate firm to sell 56 buildings that currently house U.S. Post Offices. All 56 were built, operated, and paid for by tax-paying American citizens. Now enjoy reading the rest: The government has decided it no longer needs these buildings, most of which are located on prime land in towns and cities across the country. 
The sale of these properties will fetch about$19 billion! 
A regular real estate commission will be paid to the company that was given the exclusive listing for handling the sales. That company is CRI and it belongs to a man named Richard Blum. 
Richard Blum is the husband of Senator Dianne Feinstein!(Most voters and many of the government people who approved the deal have not made the connection between the two because they have different last names).
Senator Feinstein and her husband stand to make a fortune, estimated at between $950 million and $1.1 BILLION from these transactions! 
His company is the sole real estate agent on the sale! 
CRI will be making a minimum of 2% and as much as 6% commission on each and every sale. All of the properties that are being sold are all fully paid for. They were purchased with U.S. taxpayers’ dollars. 
The U.S.P.S. is allowed free and clear, tax exempt use. The only cost to keep them open is the cost to actually keep the doors open and the heat and lights on. The United States Postal Service doesn’t even have to pay county property taxes on these subject properties. QUESTION? Would you put your house in foreclosure just because you couldn’t afford to pay the electric bill? 
Well, the folks in Washington have given the Post Office the OK to do it! Worse yet, most of the net proceeds of the sales will go back to the U.S.P.S, an organization that is so poorly managed that they have lost $117 billion dollars in the past 10 years! 
No one in the mainstream media is even raising an eyebrow over the conflict of interest and on the possibility of corruption on the sale of billions of dollars worth of public assets. 
How does a U.S. Senator from San Francisco manage to get away with organizing and lobbying such a sweet deal ? Has our government become so elitist that they have no fear of oversight? 
It’s no mere coincidence that these two public service crooks have different last names; a feeble attempt at avoiding transparency in these type of transactions. 
Pass this info on before it’s pulled from the Internet. You can verify it on TruthorFiction and Snopes: 
If this doesn’t upset you, don’t complain about the corruption and the ineptness in D.C.

On tortured reasoning

11 Dec
A note for liberaltarians on the politically motivated and timed release of the Congressional hearings on the CIA:

“Do you seriously think torturing people is funny?”

No but I don’t think water boarding is torture.

I think torture is something that leaves permanent physical, or perhaps mental, damage. Not pain or emotional distress. And it doesn’t matter if the UN or national governments or treaties have some other definition.
I think that’s why they have to use equivocal phrases like enhanced interrogation techniques – it’s not actually torture. Loud music and sleep deprivation aren’t torture. If these people were innocents or not captured on a battlefield then even detaining them would be a crime. But they are part of a terrorist cell, so detaining them and playing loud music at them is not criminal if they are guilty.
So if you liberaltarians want me to take you seriously you have to do two things: 1) don’t complain that bloodthirsty savage Islamofascists are being made uncomfortable, complain only that you want them to be tried first; and 2) denounce the retarded Obamanoid and leftover memes that go on and on about the terrible torture of these bastards while overlooking Obama drones that kill suspected terrorists instead of detaining them and “torturing” them, drones that also kill entire families, wedding parties, bazaars etc of innocent people near them.
I hear statistics often on what high percentages of those released have returned to working with terrorist groups. I understand some of them may be attracted to those groups because their experience with the U.S. military has made them anti-imperialist. If they join groups that behead humanitarian aid workers I feel nothing for them, even with that explanation.
Virtually all “progressive” memes on this overlook Obama droning even when the question is put to them as it was at yesterday’s White House press conference. Additionally, to the charge that some innocents have been “renditioned,” which would be horrific, I would ask if legal and penal systems should be scrapped (as opposed to reformed) because sometimes an innocent person is convicted. And also if not having interrogation means the regime uses drones instead and kills more innocent people than it would if it instead detained and interrogated its targets.

By the way, one curious aspect of the allegation that numerous detainees were innocent and not part of terrorist groups originally, even if they joined them after being released – why have so few of them appeared in interviews after release on MSNBC, Al Jazeera, or RT describing their ordeal?

Democrats hope to censor Internet

13 Sep



Print ArticleSend a Tip

Yesterday the US Senate attempted to define who is and is not a journalist. In the process of passing a “Shield Law” to protect journalists and their sources, a fiery debate ensued over just who is a journalist and who deserves the shield law protection. 

Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) was adamant to only extend the protection to “real reporters” and not, she said, a 17-year-old with his own website.

“I can’t support it if everyone who has a blog has a special privilege … or if Edward Snowden were to sit down and write this stuff, he would have a privilege. I’m not going to go there.”
Matt Drudge, a man who redefined journalism at the dawn of the new media, and continues to lead the industry in traffic and influence took to Twitter to defend bloggers and to hammer the senator:

And Drudge is speaking from personal experience. There was a time when the political and media establishment targeted him as “Public Enemy #1” and his groundbreaking work was derided as the end of journalism.  Drudge tweets that even a federal judge attempted to define his work as non-journalism: