The latest “Stimulus Funds” program called “Build Back Better” was designed by lobbyists and insiders as the largest crony payola scam in history. Of the original two trillion dollars proposed, ONE TRILLION DOLLARS of that money was for bribes and stock market payola that was going, through a tentacular, covert, set of shenanigans, into Senator’s (and their families) pockets! Almost none of the money was going to citizens. Much of the money was going to developers who were friends of the White House financiers.
“…This is about a group of U.S. Senators, Silicon Valley Oligarchs and crooked lobbyists who commit crimes in order to manipulate over a trillion State and federal tax dollars into their, and their friends, pockets. They trade bribes in the form of: Billions of dollars of Google, Twitter, Facebook, Tesla, Netflix and Sony Pictures stock and stock warrants which is never reported to the FEC; Billions of dollars of Google, Twitter, Facebook, Tesla, Netflix and Sony Pictures search engine rigging and shadow-banning which is never reported to the FEC; Free rent; Rare-Earth mining rights; Male and female prostitutes; Cars; Dinners; Party Financing; Sports Event Tickets; Political campaign printing and mailing services “Donations”; Secret PAC Financing; Jobs in Corporations in Silicon Valley; “Consulting” contracts from McKinsey as fronted pay-off gigs; Overpriced “Speaking Engagements” which are really just pay-offs conduited for donors; Gallery art; Private jet rides and the use of Government fuel depots (ie: Google handed out NASA jet fuel to staff); Recreational drugs; Real Estate; Fake mortgages; The use of Cayman, Boca Des Tores, Swiss and related money-laundering accounts; The use of HSBC, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs and Deustche Bank money laundering accounts and covert stock accounts; Free spam and bulk mailing services owned by Silicon Valley corporations; Use of high tech law firms such as Perkins Coie (THE KING OF HIT-JOBS), Wilson Sonsini, MoFo, Covington & Burling, etc. to conduit bribes to officials; and other means now documented by us, The FBI, the FTC, The SEC, The FEC and journalists…”
Our database efforts and FBI, SEC, FTC and Congressional reporting programs mine existing financial relays in order to destroy the use of those resources for political bribery, money laundering, payola and related corruption.
Large financial-services conglomerates combine commercial banking, investment banking, and sometimes insurance. Such combinations were common in Europe but illegal in the United States prior to the passage of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. The following are large investment banking firms (not listed above) that are affiliated with large financial institutions:
ultimately part of C.E. Unterberg, Towbin, with parts sold to Oppenheimer. Not to be confused with Rothschild & Co (the result of a merger of the British N.M. Rothschild & Sons with the French Rothschild & Cie); see Rothschild family
The tech oligarchs and U.S. politicians employ a “Magic Circle” of crooked law firms to operate their schemes. The term is a derivation of the widely recognised London “magic circle” of top law firms, and is widely used in the offshore legal industry. The term has also become used to describe the offshore legal industry in a more pejorative sense (e.g. when the general media reports on paradise papers–type offshore financial scandals), and is therefore more sparingly used, or found, in major legal publications (e.g. Legal Business).
There is no consensus definition over which firms belong in the offshore magic circle. A 2008 article in the publication Legal Business (Issue 181, Offshore Review, February 2008) suggested a list, which has been repeated by others, and is simply the top 10 offshore law firms, but excluding Gibraltar–specialist Hassans.[a]
…to the smaller MossackFonseca & Co (Panama Papers) kind of boutique tax evasion and money laundering firms, of which there are thousands. A political family such as the Feinstein’s, The Pelosi’s, The Musk’s, etc. employ nearly a hundred of the types of entities listed on this page. Google’s venture capitalists and executives employ one of the largest networks of these kinds of obfuscation experts in the world.
Dense the legal relationships have become between modern economies and “offshore” tax havens via Conduit OFCs, and the rise in offshore magic circle firms setting up offices in modern corporate–focused tax havens, like Dublin.
U.S. Senators Are Paid Bribes, By Big Tech, Via Their Stock Market Mutual Funds
Senators want America to think that it is “OK, if they, and their families, just own ‘Mutual Funds” in the stock market…” THEY ARE LYING. Those stock market mutual funds have tricky layers of ‘back-doors’ in them which allow Google, Facebook, YouTube, Alphabet, Elon Musk, George Soros, Eric Schmidt, and that crowd, to pay bribes to Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris, The Biden family, Dianne Feinstein and White House senior staff ( All of whom protect Big Tech from regulation) . David Plouffe and Steve Westly have ‘Stock Operatives’ who have provided key details…
Every One of these financial scam tricks( https://www.sec.gov/files/Algo_Trading_Report_2020.pdf ) is used daily by the suspects in this case:
** The Silicon Valley Stock Scam Called: “Pools“
Agreements, often written, among a group of traders to delegate authority to a single manager to trade in a specific stock for a specific period of time and then to share in the resulting profits or losses.” In Australia section 1041B prohibits pooling. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_manipulation#cite_note-5 )
** The Silicon Valley Stock Scam Called: “Churning“
When a trader places both buy and sell orders at about the same price. The increase in activity is intended to attract additional investors, and increase the price.
** The Silicon Valley Stock Scam Called: “Stock bashing“
This scheme is usually orchestrated by savvy online message board posters (a.k.a. “Bashers”) who make up false and/or misleading information about the target company in an attempt to get shares for a cheaper price. This activity, in most cases, is conducted by posting libelous posts on multiple public forums. The perpetrators sometimes work directly for unscrupulous Investor Relations firms who have convertible notes that convert for more shares the lower the bid or ask price is; thus the lower these Bashers can drive a stock price down by trying to convince shareholders they have bought a worthless security, the more shares the Investor Relations firm receives as compensation. Immediately after the stock conversion is complete and shares are issued to the Investor Relations firm, consultant, attorney or similar party, the basher/s then become friends of the company and move quickly to ensure they profit on a classic Pump & Dump scheme to liquidate their ill-gotten shares. (see P&D)
** The Silicon Valley Stock Scam Called: “Pump and dump“
A pump and dump scheme is generally part of a more complex grand plan of market manipulation on the targeted security. The Perpetrators (Usually stock promoters) convince company affiliates and large position non-affiliates to release shares into a free trading status as “Payment” for services for promoting the security. Instead of putting out legitimate information about a company the promoter sends out bogus e-mails (the “Pump”) to millions of unsophisticated investors (Sometimes called “Retail Investors”) in an attempt to drive the price of the stock and volume to higher points. After they accomplish both, the promoter sells their shares (the “Dump”) and the stock price falls, taking all the duped investors’ money with it.
** The Silicon Valley Stock Scam Called: “Lure and Squeeze“
This works with a company that is very distressed on paper, with impossibly high debt, consistently high annual losses but very few assets, making it look as if bankruptcy must be imminent. The stock price gradually falls as people new to the stock short it on the basis of the poor outlook for the company, until the number of shorted shares greatly exceeds the total number of shares that are not held by those aware of the lure and squeeze scheme (call them “people in the know”). In the meantime, people in the know increasingly purchase the stock as it drops to lower and lower prices. When the short interest has reached a maximum, the company announces it has made a deal with its creditors to settle its loans in exchange for shares of stock (or some similar kind of arrangement that leverages the stock price to benefit the company), knowing that those who have short positions will be squeezed as the price of the stock sky-rockets. Near its peak price, people in the know start to sell, and the price gradually falls back down again for the cycle to repeat.
** The Silicon Valley Stock Scam Called: “Quote stuffing“
Quote stuffing is made possible by high-frequency trading programs that can execute market actions with incredible speed. However, high-frequency trading in and of itself is not illegal. The tactic involves using specialized, high-bandwidth hardware to quickly enter and withdraw large quantities of orders in an attempt to flood the market, thereby gaining an advantage over slower market participants.( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_manipulation#cite_note-9 )
** The Silicon Valley Stock Scam Called: “Cross-Product Manipulation“
A type of manipulation possible when financial instruments are settled based on benchmarks set by the trading of physical commodities, for example in United States Natural Gas Markets. The manipulator takes a large long (short) financial position that will benefit from the benchmark settling at a higher (lower) price, then trades in the physical commodity markets at such a large volume as to influence the benchmark price in the direction that will benefit their financial position.
** The Silicon Valley Stock Scam Called: “Spoofing (finance)“
Spoofing is a disruptive algorithmic trading entity employed by traders to outpace other market participants and to manipulate commodity markets. Spoofers feign interest in trading futures, stocks and other products in financial markets creating an illusion of exchange pessimism in the futures market when many offers are being cancelled or withdrawn, or false optimism or demand when many offers are being placed in bad faith. Spoofers bid or offer with intent to cancel before the orders are filled. The flurry of activity around the buy or sell orders is intended to attract other high-frequency traders (HFT) to induce a particular market reaction such as manipulating the market price of a security. Spoofing can be a factor in the rise and fall of the price of shares and can be very profitable to the spoofer who can time buying and selling based on this manipulation.
** The Silicon Valley Stock Scam Called: “Price-Fixing“
A very simple type of fraud where the principles who publish a price or indicator conspire to set it falsely and benefit their own interests. The Libor scandal for example, involved bankers setting the Libor rate to benefit their trader’s portfolios or to make certain entities appear more creditworthy than they were.
** The Silicon Valley Stock Scam Called: “High Closing (finance)“
High closing is an attempt to manipulate the price of a security at the end of trading day to ensure that it closes higher than it should. This is usually achieved by putting in manipulative trades close to closing.
** The Silicon Valley Stock Scam Called: “Cornering the market“
** The Silicon Valley Stock Scam Called: “The Conduit Double Blind“
In this scam, government money is given to a Tesla, Solyndra, etc. who then money launder the cash through executive-held 501 c3 and c4 charities; and company assets and then provide DARK MONEY cash and services to political campaigns like Obama and Clinton election funds. In the case of Tesla, Google (an investor and boyfriend of Musk) supplied billions of dollars of web search rigging. Stock ownership in the companies and deals is traded for campaign funds. David Brock is a master of this kind of Dark Money money-laundering for political campaigns using PACS and pass-through spoofing.
Tesla and Solyndra investors have used ALL of the above tactics and more. Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan have thousands of staff who PROVIDE these stock market manipulation tricks to people like Elon Musk, Larry Page, Eric Schmidt, et al. These kinds of financial crimes and corruption account for the manipulation of over ONE TRILLION DOLLARS of ill-gotten profits annually!
Given the massive stimulus packages that are in force today and expected to be implemented going forward, regulators need to set clear guidelines for how and when such privileged information can be disclosed, and impose rigorous trading restrictions for investors with access to private information. Failure to do so always gives unfair advantage to some and damages the level playing field in financial markets.
To avoid providing such unfair advantage to selected executives, the SEC and the Department of Justice need to develop new procedures to incorporate potential illegal transactions derived from information about government intervention through diverse channels. Plaintiffs advocate for a more transparent and consistent protocol on information disclosure regarding government’s loan programs to prevent similar events from recurring. For example, the government could channel the release of news about COVID-19-related stimulus interventions through a common platform to prevent leakage from diverse sources and reduce information asymmetry among investors.
The DFC loan to Kodak is the first of its kind under the Defense Production Act but not the first ever because GOVT already created the pump-and-dump scheme for tech oligarchs. Nobody should be surprised by Kodak trying a proven corruption scam. Since we are in unprecedented times, government agencies and regulators need to make changes to adapt to the current situation and fulfill their mission to ensure a level playing field for investors even during this difficult period. Regulation never happens in theses scams because most California Senators and their families profit from these crimes and corruption.
Potential Defendants include State And Federal Agencies and their executives. The assets, bank accounts and high recovery values of these targets are known and documented by public forensics experts. The evidence and subpoena-capable reinforcement of that evidence is substantial in this matter.
The targeted parties have been forensically tracked to illicit campaign financing, hacking, bribes, political payola, stock-market rigging, slush-funds, false-front shell corporations and family trusts, abuse of corporate funds, advertising metrics frauds, RICO statute violation organized crime, employee abuse, electronic communications intended to evade law enforcement and other charges. In Palantir, XKeyScore, ICIJ, SEC, FINCEN and other law enforcement databases the financial records of these crooks, and their families, are all cross-linked and clearly show the bribery and payola. Terminations and interdictions for each party and their illicit actions have been continuing successfully. The termination of this network of parties will, effectively, terminate The Cartel in question. Each and every legal take-down has now passed the 50% vector and is proceeding to completion.
Real estate developers, Social media oligarchs, Sand Hill Road VC’s and Big Tech CEO’s pay the largest, and most diverse, set of bribes!
Tech oligarchs tightening their payola grip on Democrats with epic bribes
The current state of the Republican Party may seem like a demolition derby, but there’s an equally fascinating, if less well-understood, conflict within the Democratic Party. In this case, the disruptive force is largely Silicon Valley, a natural oligarchy that now funds a party teetering toward populism and even socialism.
The fundamental contradictions, as Karl Marx would have noted, lie in the collision of interests between a group that has come to epitomize self-consciously progressive megawealth and a mass base which is increasingly concerned about downward mobility. For all his occasional populist lapses, President Obama generally has embraced Silicon Valley as an intrinsic part of his political coalition. He has even enlisted several tech giants – including venture capitalist John Doerr, LinkedIn billionaire Reid Hoffman and Sun Microsystems co-founder Vinod Khosla – in helping plan out Obama’s no-doubt lavish and highly political retirement.
In contrast, Hillary Clinton is hardly the icon in the Valley and its San Francisco annex as are both her husband and President Obama. But her “technocratic liberalism,” albeit hard to pin down, and close ties to the financial oligarchs seems more congenial than the grass-roots populism identified with Bernie Sanders, her chief rival for the Democratic presidential nomination.
“They don’t like Sanders at all,” notes researcher Greg Ferenstein, who has been polling Internet company founders for an upcoming book. Sanders’ emphasis on income redistribution and protecting union privileges and pensions is hardly popular among the tech elite. “He’s an egalitarian liberal,” Ferenstein explains, “These people are tech liberals. Equality is a nonissue in Silicon Valley.”
This conflict is most obvious in the assault on ride-booking firms, like Uber, by progressives like Sanders, as well as New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio. This battle reveals a deepening split between the party’s mass base, including conventional taxi companies and operators, and its increasingly influential tech business allies.
Some conservatives, such as pollster Scott Rasmussen, see Republican backing for Uber as an opening for the GOP. Yet Ferenstein’s poll of Internet founders reveals that barely 3 percent say they are Republicans; 18 percent are libertarian, while nearly half are Democrats. Republican operatives peg the tech donors to be 9-1 in favor of Democrats. Talk about unrequited love!
Overall, the hotbeds of the tech and information economies, including media, have become the financial bedrock of the Democratic Party. The 10 leading counties for Democratic fundraising in 2012 included, for the first time, Santa Clara, as well as San Francisco, Los Angeles and New York. Given their domination of the ranks of wealthy people under age 40, one can expect that this power will only increase in the years ahead.
This suggests that the tech elite, far from deserting the Democratic Party, more likely will aim take to it over. They are doing this, as other industries have, by absorbing key party operatives. Uber, for example, uses Obama campaign manager David Ploufee to lead its public relations, while other former officials have joined other tech firms such as Airbnb, Google, Twitter and Amazon.
This conflict between populists and tech oligarchs has been muted in the past, in large part due to common views on social issues like gay marriage and, to some extent, environmental protection. But as the social issues fade, having been “won” by progressives, the focus necessarily moves to economics, where the gap between these two factions is greatest.
Fundamentally, Silicon Valley worships at the altar of “disruption,” seeking ways to create at least the prospect of megaprofits by doing things differently. Change is celebrated by those who benefit the most from it. But groups – from cab drivers to Hollywood tradespeople, even hotel workers – whose livelihoods are threatened by the disruptions of the “share” economy, may not be so sanguine.
Other aspects of the Silicon Valley mentality – what Ferenstein calls “the politics of the creative class” – reveal the unconscious elitism of its worldview. Although their industry is overwhelming based amid the Bay Area’s suburban sprawl, the Internet oligarchs, he claims, want “everyone” to move in to the urban center, something not remotely practical for most middle- and working-class families. Other policies advocated by the oligarchs, such as pushing for ever-higher energy prices, don’t threaten their lifestyles but are devastating to the classes below them.
Perhaps the biggest area of disagreement between the oligarchy and the populists is the role of labor unions. Simply put, the oligarchs are, at best, indifferent, if not hostile, to union influence. After all, tech has blossomed virtually without organized labor, which remains a bulwark of Democratic operations. Silicon Valley-backed attempts to reform schools, or weaken pensions for government workers, can expect ferocious opposition from the unions.
Another potential dividing line can be seen on immigration, where left-leaning groups like the Economic Policy Institute have campaigned against attempts by establishment Democrats and Republicans alike to expand the H1B and other “guest worker” visa programs. In a moment of politically incorrect candor, Sen. Sanders suggested that the kind of “open borders” policy advocated by Silicon Valley, libertarians and immigration activists would result in “substantially lower wages” for working-class Americans.
Right now, the populists have numbers on their side, as well as much of the media. The recent New York Times expose on Amazon’s brutal management practices reveals a deep discord between the media mouthpieces of the political Left and their usual capitalist heroes from the information economy.
The biggest challenge for the tech oligarchs is that their rise has come as class divisions have widened, and inequality has grown. The benefits to society of the current technology wave – outside of being able to more conveniently waste time on your phone – whether in terms of creating jobs (outside of the Bay Area) or boosting productivity, appear largely limited.
Yet given what many find the unattractive nature of the Republican alternative, one can expect the oligarchs to seek out a modus vivendi with the populists. They could exchange a regime of higher taxes and regulation for ever-expanding crony capitalist opportunities and political protection. As the hegemons of today, Facebook and Google, not to mention Apple and Amazon, have an intense interest in protecting themselves, for example, from antitrust legislation. History is pretty clear: Heroic entrepreneurs of one decade often turn into the insider capitalists of the next.
Tech people certainly have no objection to joining the ranks of crony capitalists, notably when cloaked in environmentally green garb. The solar energy and electric car empire of Elon Musk has been made possible by subsidies; unlike most manufacturing industries, he has a well-developed interest in the most Draconian energy legislation. Other tech figures, including Doerr, Khosla and top executives at Google, have benefited from government-subsidized renewable-energy schemes.
These ventures produce very expensive energy – an economic disaster for most Californians – but have been bolstered by alliances with unions, which seek to monopolize construction within green industries. Rather than seek at least some alliance with the Right, it seems more likely that the oligarchs will be forced to make some concessions to the populist Left, including to women and minorities, groups unrepresented in the tech industry.
A possible model for such an alliance can be seen in the coupling of San Francisco hedge-fund billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer and his Latino sidekick, the now-well-funded climate-change acolyte state Senate President pro Tem Kevin de León of Los Angeles, by such things as using cap-and-trade funds to fund a relatively small number of affordable houses. With the industrial economy hampered by regulation, the old blue-collar economy is dying off. This means the oligarchs may need only to support a few symbolic measures to benefit those who no longer have a productive place in the economy.
Steyer even has plans in 2018 to succeed Gov. Jerry Brown, who he thinks may not have been sufficiently Draconian in his campaign against climate change. Steyer will probably be able to count on the support of de León and other Latino politicians whom Steyer finances.
The new platform would be a combination of climate change militancy and redistribution of wealth to the poor who, due in large part to the policies advocated by Silicon Valley, have little hope of moving up economically, much less buying a home in our state. This “upstairs downstairs” coalition – largely indifferent to the interests of the traditional middle class or working class – may well represent the future of the Democratic Party, initially in the Golden State and, increasingly, nationally.
Of course, Bernie Sanders may yet have his moment, but the America he represents, that of sure things and widespread equality, will fade with him. The economic future likely belongs not to the populists but to the oligarchs and those in politics who choose to tap their money and influence to gain power. Welcome to the 21st century.
Joel Kotkin is the R.C. Hobbs Fellow in Urban Studies at Chapman University in Orange and the executive director of the Houston-based Center for Opportunity Urbanism (www.opportunityurbanism.org).
His most recent book is “The New Class Conflict” (Telos Publishing: 2014).
HERE ARE THE BRIBES “JOHN” WITNESSED AT THE WHITE HOUSE AND IN PALO ALTO:
– Federal bribes are never clean. They always become complicated because of the “I want some too” factor
– The transactions, and documented quid pro quo, not only qualify for, but exceed, the requirements for Federal Racketeering indictments
– When an adjacent entity finds out there is a bribe going on, they can use the knowledge of the bribe to extort sub-bribes
– BRIBE 1 = Free NASA jet fuel, NASA partial agency closure and exclusive private supplier contracts to Space X, NASA Ames airport exclusive hand-over for Google & billionaire jets as payback for campaign resources
– BRIBE 2 = Exclusive free federal taxpayer cash from Department of Energy in spite of low credit ratings and failing reviews in actual side-by-side comparisons of ALL applicants
– BRIBE 3 = Exclusive tax credits, exclusive carbon credits, exclusive factory fee discounts, exclusive employee tax waivers, and land discounts from state underwritten by feds
– BRIBE 4 = First position in federal contract allocations
– BRIBE 5 = Real estate discounts and ongoing revenue upsides from contiguous Tesla/Solyndra real estate and pass-along leases which Senator Feinstein’s family exploited
– BRIBE 6 = Loans by Billonaire campaign backers who were investors in Google, Tesla and “CleanTech” to Senators campaign PACs and funds
– BRIBE 7 = Loans by Billonaire campaign backers who were investors in Google, Tesla and “CleanTech” to DNC and Presidential campaign office campaign PACs and funds via conduited means
– BRIBE 8 = Payments of campaign bills by Billionaire campaign backers who were investors in Google, Tesla and “CleanTech via conduit-ed means
– BRIBE 9 = Provision of Search Engine manipulation, mood manipulation and competing interest web-search deletion on Silicon Valley global web architecture
– BRIBE 10 = Sex workers as deal incentives
– BRIBE 11 = Provision of federal funds and filings in a manner intended to be used for, and which were used to alter SEC securities filings, aligned with manipulated news distribution by insiders in order to defraud the stock market and falsify stock values for personal profit relative to Tesla, Solyndra, Abound, Fisker and related entities
– BRIBE 12 = The service, provided by the Department of Energy, whereby all competitors to the stock portfolios of the Billonaire campaign backers who were investors in Google, Tesla and “CleanTech” were terminated, stone-walled and review-manipulated by the actions of the Department of Energy
– BRIBE 13 = Revolving door jobs for White House and DOE staff in exchange for favorable federal decisions
– BRIBE 14 = Custom authored white-papers by McKinsey Consulting, the content of which was directed by Billionaire campaign backers, who were investors in Google, Tesla and “CleanTech, and Steven Chu, Steven Spinner and Matt Rogers, who then became the heads of the DOE funding. These White Papers were distributed to the White House and Congress by lobbyists working for the Billionaire campaign backers who were investors in Google, Tesla and “CleanTech”. The white-papers were constructed in order to give a false impression of Clean-tech and happened to favor only the stock investments of Billionaire campaign backers, who were investors in Google, Tesla and “CleanTech”. The manipulated white-papers were used to sell Congress, via contrived data, on plans beneficial only to the Billionaire campaign backers, who were investors in Google, Tesla and “CleanTech
– BRIBE 15 = Possible terminations. An inordinately large number of individuals connected to this bribe died during this event. All of the deaths were unexpected, untimely, non-indicated by current medical conditions and game-changing by ironically reducing the risk of exposure in most of the cases
– BRIBE 16 = Orders by White House staff, to DOJ, SEC & FBI to “leave this matter alone for now”. Ordered failure-to-enforce
– BRIBE 17 = Senior position Jobs at DOE and DOJ
– BRIBE 18 = Lack of review, “don’t observe” process as Solyndra, Abound, Fisker, etc. were immediately failing. Orders to avoid noticing the failures in order to cover up campaign negatives
– BRIBE 19 = Down-favoring of non portfolio and competing technologies by the Department of Energy via Steven Chu, thus removing them from support and off the playing field
– The press has widely reported on underage boy sex clubs and the payment to parents for the blood of young boys by these oligarchs.A large number of tech VC’s and senior executives are covert gay activists who hire women to act as their “beards”.Their elitist Yale and Stanford fraternity house upbringingspromoted “bromances”, “rape culture” and a don’t-worry-daddy-will-fix-it mentality.
– The perpetrators have used their exclusive monopolized cash flow of taxpayer financed grants, contracts and internet infrastructure to purchase the majority of the political lobby firms and technology law firms in America. This gives them an illegal, illicit and unfair ability to control: 1.) which laws are made or stalled, 2.) who gets government funded or blocked, 3.) Who gets tax breaks, tax credits and tax waivers and who does not, 4.) Who gets state-sponsored reprisal targeting or benefits blockades, 5.) Who gets revolving door payola jobs at their companies, 6.) Who gets PAC money bribes, 7.) and many other effects that are legally defined as “racketeering”.
– The perpetrators conspire, coordinate and manually manipulate their digital media mass broadcasts in order to collude in a manner that injects coordinated subliminal messages, that no regular voting citizen can detect, into their media in order to manipulate co-aligned political and ideological messages that will promote their ideological beliefs and promote public and policy actions which will provide profits to their stock market holdings which they co-own. Many of those stock market holders, (ie: in Tesla, Google, Abound, Solyndra, rare earth metals, Disney, etc) were coordinated between all of the perpetrators by their partners at JP Morgan, Bear Stearns, Goldman Sachs in such a manner as to collude to rig markets via insider trading ownership’s that U.S. Senators, and their families, shared.
– The perpetrators have used their subliminal media control technologies to manipulate every national election since 2008.
– The perpetrators use a contrived Scientology-like hiring and HR management system which seeks out the most vulnerable, naive, easily influenced, and damaged people to fill their employee coffers with, in order to do their bidding. Their employees are nothing less than tools, sheep and fodder for their media manipulations, sexual abuses and ego-mania.
– These people are absolutely evil, sick and sociopath-like individuals who operate with impunity because they are never arrested. They thumb their noses at the law and anyone who does not agree with them. They create fake political issues to milk the emotions of the public in order to gain power.”
Another posting describes Silicon Valley like this:
“The Palo Alto Mafia is an ad hoc organized crime group that violates RICO racketeering laws by engaging in dark money political corruption.
These mobsters use covert dark money schemes to direct elected officials to take public tax money and put that money in their pockets and the pockets of their campaign financier associates while using government resources to sabotage competitors. They pay the bribes to the political officials via stock market warrants, prostitutes, credit cards, real estate, mortgages, loans, revolving door jobs, contracts and other dark money.
Counter-measures against these criminals are aimed at making sure they are exposed, doxed, shamed and arrested! Private/public databases have been created to track and destroy all of their stock market holdings, Silicon Valley monoplies, off-shore spider holes, covert payola trusts, hidden shell corporations, sex trafficking clubs, emails, credit cards, stock accounts, covert real estate holdings, tax write-off profit fronts and other illicit assets.
They accrued money and power by creating mass hyper-scaled monopolies, mostly in new digital markets, by exploiting exclusive government financed resources provided by laws, grants and contracts that the politicians, that they owned, produced exclusively for them while locking out their competitors.
Although often exposed in such cases as the “AngelGate Collusion Case”, “The Silicon Valley No Poaching Class Action Lawsuit”, “The Damore Case”, and hundreds of other cases, their ownership of the senior executives at FBI, SEC, FTC, FEC, OSC, DOJ and other enforcement agencies has, so far, prevented their formal interdiction.
While using billions of dollars of PR agencies to promote a “crunchy-granola”, we-are-saving-the-world, “goodie-two-shoes” image for each of themselves, behind the scenes they conspire, collude, sex traffic, bribe, spy, black-list, payola, media bias control, censor, abuse and use Democracy as their play-thing for their sociopath addictions to power and money.
They bankrupted old-school print media and replaced it with digital media which they control to promote only their profiteering ideology. They control almost all search engines and media servers to rig them to censor public information and mass manipulate social perspectives using the automated tactics exposed in documentaries like: “The Creepy Line” and 60 Minutes segments about “Information brokers”.
They pay their bribes to their politicians and operatives using dark money relayed by corrupt law firms, lobbyists, media services and character assassination services like IN-Q-Tel; Gawker Media; Jalopnik; Gizmodo Media; K2 Intelligence WikiStrat; Podesta Group; Fusion GPS; Google; YouTube; Alphabet; Facebook; Twitter; Think Progress; Media Matters; Definers; Black Cube; Roger Stone, Mossad; Correct The Record; Sand Line; Blackwater; Stratfor ; ShareBlue; Wikileaks; Cambridge Analytica; Sid Blumenthal; David Brock; Covington and Burling, Perkins Coie, Wilson Sonsini and hundreds of others…
There are over 150 sudden, unexpected, suspicious deaths associated with person’s who were at odds with this organized crime group ranging from “suicides”, strange accidents and clear murders.
The tremendous number of sex scandals this group has been involved in are related to their need to control others, a key character trait of the sociopath psychological profile demonstrated by the majority of them.
They instruct the HR staff of the companies they own to only hire naive young employees that will appear to follow their echo-chamber-optimized, highly controlled corporate ideology culture. Any who fall out of proper “group-think” are fired until they have culled a perfect clone army of indoctrinated followers to push their political and profiteering control goals.
A large number of them are homosexual, subscribe to the Jewish cultural social training and are deeply influenced by collegiate fraternity and sorority teachings about social roles and elitism.
They are known by a number of names including:
“The PayPal Mafia”
“The Silicon Valley Oligarchs”
“The Deep State”
“The Billionaire Frat Boy Club”
“The Bohemian Club”
“The KPCB Cosa Nostra”
“The Guardsmen Club”
“The Greylock Greys” and other AKA’s
This mob has so much cash from unjust gains, and hires so many out-of-control lobbyists and defamation services, that they have totally broken the Democratic process.
Together they use the key political tactic of “heart-string” stock market pumping.
They deploy a coordinated PR program that hypes a certain fabricated “issue” which will end up increasing the valuation of stock market stocks they own.
“Immigration” creates more DNC voters which allow them to control more Senators who, in return, create more policies which increase the valuation of the Mafia’s stock market holdings at JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs.
“Climate Change” causes more government cash for the solar panels, wind farms, lithium ion batteries and electric cars which the Palo Alto Mafia owns the exclusive rights to. The more they can push a “crisis” perception about climate change, the more cash they can put in their pockets. Goldman Sachs is the “advisor” for Tesla, Solyndra and most “green” Mafia companies.
The private profits of this scheme involve over SIX TRILLION DOLLARS of tax money. That is why they will lie, cheat, steal and even kill to keep their plot going.
The top ways to prevent these crimes are to 1.) outlaw lobbying and 2.) create a ten year moratorium of politicians working in politics. The Palo Alto Mafia spends over 16 BILLION DOLLARS per year in lobbying efforts to prevent this from happening.
The Palo Alto Mafia self-deludes and echo-chambers their peers into a frenzy of increasingly violent thought about all those who oppose their schemes and covertly supports ANTIFA as a surrogate entity so that they can sit in their Woodside mansions and “remote-control” disruptions and political resistance.
In fact, they are sociopath criminals deserving arrest by federal police and prosection under RICO Racketeering laws…”
SILICON VALLEY BRIBERY TACTIC: BRIBING “JOURNALISTS” TO COLLUDE TO PUT “YOUR” CANDIDATE IN OFFICE THAT PROMISED YOU THE GOVERNMENT GRANTS AND CONTRACTS:
In this REDDIT posting, you can see the darkest view of this crowd:
“…– That these FBI-filed facts are not ‘Conspiracy Theories’ but daily occurrences in politics as proven by every major news outlet in the world, federal court records, FBI records and Congressional investigation reports.
– That we are federal whistle-blowers and business competitors of public officials who operated illegal and Constitutional-rights-violating reprisal hit-jobs and attacks against us using taxpayer financed resources.
– That State and Federal agencies owe us money, and other consideration, to pay for our: 1.) Damages, 2.)losses, 3.) benefits blockades, 4.) witness fees, 5.) whistle-blower fees, 6.) informant fees, 7.) punitive compensation, 8.) legal costs and other items caused by criminal corruption, reprisal attacks and illicit quid-pro-quo operations within their government offices by their government employees, contractors and covert financiers.
– That a Smedley Butler-style ‘Business Plot’ crime program exists between Silicon Valley Tech Oligarch billionaires, investment banks, U.S. Senators, government agency staff and White House staff to engage in these crimes.
– That public officials knowingly participate in these crimes by failing to report their associates who engage in these illicit actions and by hiring Google, Fusion-GPS and Black Cube-type suppliers who operate these illicit activities in revolving door schemes.
– That the suspects manipulate government funds for their personal profiteering at the expense of domestic citizen taxpayers like us and acquire what the U.S. Treasury calls: “unjust gain”.
– That the suspects operate a vast stock market manipulation program, as a core function of their operations, and exchange most of their bribes via the stock market and those illicit deeds function at the expense of the public.
– That the suspects contract a known group of lobbyists, corrupt law firms, unethical CPA’s, corrupt investment banks and specialized corruption services providers to attack, defame, physically harm, character assassinate (Using their Google, Youtube, Gizmodo, Fusion GPS, Black Cube, UC Global, Media Matters, et al, “kill” services), black-list and harm those they dislike and that they harmed us with those actions.
– That the suspects operate an Epstein-like sex-trafficking network network of prostitutes and sexual extortion activities and locations for the engagement of said activities and for the bribery of cohorts via sex workers.
– That the suspects engage in electronic attacks ( https://www.privacytools.io ) and manipulations including hacking, election manipulation, media censorship and internet search results manipulation in order to mask their schemes.
– That we have yet to find a single Palo Alto Sandhill Road VC in this group who is not involved in bribery, racism, sexism, tax evasion, sex trafficking, black-listing, securities law violations, violent abuse, off-shore money-laundering, FEC violations, search engine manipulation, massive anti-trust violations, patent theft and other crimes!
– That the suspects engage in ‘Lois Lerner’ IRS-like, SPYGATE-like, VA whistleblower-like reprisal and retribution attacks by manipulating resources within government agencies like SSA, DOJ, FBI, LSC, HUD, HHS, DOE, Etc….”
Big Tech Companies Spend Millions On California Political Bribes To Senators And Guv
SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom solicited donations totaling nearly $227 million from Facebook, Google, Blue Shield and other private California companies and organizations to combat the coronavirus pandemic and help run parts of his administration, according to a report Thursday by the state’s political watchdog agency.
“Behested payments” are contributions solicited by an elected official to be given to another individual or organization. They are less regulated than campaign contributions and grew 10-fold from 2019, Newsom’s first year in office, and 2020, when the pandemic arrived.
Facebook contributed nearly $27 million to the Democratic governor’s causes, mostly for gift cards to nursing home workers. Blue Shield of California gave $20 million toward homeless programs. Those companies were the two top donors, said the Fair Political Practices Commission, which oversees and enforces California’s campaign finance and political ethics laws.
Listed beneficiaries include the governor’s office for $42.5 million and the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services for $26 million. There was also money supporting California’s Alzheimer’s Task Force, Newsom’s California Climate Action Corps initiatives, a California Climate Day of Action, and consulting services for the administration’s Master Plan for Aging.
While California limits the amount of gifts and campaign contributions to politicians, there are no limits on behested payments. They are reportable only if they are made at the suggestion of a public official to someone else for a legislative, governmental or charitable purpose, and only if payments from a single source reach $5,000 in a calendar year.
“Unprecedented times, call for an unprecedented response,” Newsom spokesperson Daniel Lopez said in a statement.< height=”242″>He said the governor “has been committed to utilizing the innovative spirit of our private sector” and is “leveraging that strength to help improve the lives of all Californians.”
There is no suggestion that Newsom or his donors acted improperly. But critics say that while the payments don’t directly benefit the politician, they can indirectly curry favor.
For instance, former Gov. Jerry Brown repeatedly sought contributions from casinos, labor unions, wineries, insurers and major corporations to benefit the Oakland Military Institute charter school he founded in 2001 when he was mayor of the city.
Despite the nature of such behested payments, Lopez said hundreds of companies including Facebook and Blue Shield reached out to the governor’s office, not the other way around.
Campaign watchdogs fall into two camps on behested payments, said Loyola Law School professor Jessica Levinson, former president of the Los Angeles Ethics Commission.
Some believe such contributions “are the devil’s work, and they’re clearly a loophole around contribution limits and people just give them to curry favor with elected officials,” she said.
She tends to fall into the second camp, that money will inevitably flow through politics and would otherwise go to campaign accounts or independent expenditure committees.
“So if people are going to try and curry favor with elected officials, which they will, then let’s at least have that money go to a good cause,” she said.
She said the big issue is having the payments be transparently disclosed, so voters can make informed decisions on the donations and outcome.
“Not every behested payment is nefarious, but every behested payment deserves scrutiny,” said Jonathan Mehta Stein, executive director at the good government group California Common Cause. “And the explosion of behested payments recently certainly creates a perception among the public that corporations and players in state politics are using this as an avenue to get around our pay-to-play rules.”
Blue Shield and Facebook, now Meta, each said they were proud to help Californians during an unprecedented pandemic.
Aside from the governor, behested payments can be be made on behalf of numerous local and state officials, including lawmakers and statewide officeholders.
Several other states including Alabama, Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, New Mexico and New York limit or prohibit such solicitations to benefit third parties, according to California’s ethics panel.
Newsom mentioned some of his contributors in his near-daily news conferences in the early stages of the pandemic, providing publicity for some donors.
Ethics commission spokesman Jay Wierenga said requests for donations can take various forms and don’t have to come from the governor himself. They could begin with a casual request by a governor’s aide at an event or with a formal solicitation letter, and the nature of that request doesn’t have to be disclosed, just the result.
Payments made at Brown’s request topped out at less than $11 million in 2018, his last year in office, and Newsom’s at about $12 million in 2019 when he took over and sought money to pay for his inauguration festivities and various governor’s task forces.
Newsom kicked such donations into an entirely new gear in 2020.
In 2019 there was one contribution topping $1 million. The next year there were 50. Contributions between $500,000 and $1 million jumped from three to 18.
The soaring use shows “the continued importance of transparency in making sure our elected officials are accountable for the vast amounts being raised, even if they are going for very worthwhile efforts,” said commission Chairman Richard Miadich.
o the commission now requires officials to disclose any ties they may have to a non-profit receiving the money, and if the person making the payment is involved in a proceeding before the official’s agency.
That increased disclosure is a good step, said Mehta Stein, but he said the Legislature should flatly prohibit solicitations that benefit an office-holder’s spouse or other relative.
Among other donors, Google gave $10 million toward California’s COVID-19 public health awareness campaign, while Fox, YouTube, TikTok, Twitter, Snapchat, Spotify, Netflix, Pandora, Comcast, ABC and NBC were among those contributing lesser amounts.
Blue Shield’s $20 million went to support Project Homekey, Newsom’s program to use vacant hotels, motels and other unused properties as permanent supportive housing for residents without a place to live.
Tens of millions more from Kaiser Foundation, IKEA US Community Foundation, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative and individual donors Reed Hastings and Tom Steyer all went to California’s COVID-19 Response fund.
MODERN FORENSICS TRACES ALL OF THEIR SECRET BANK AND STOCK ACCOUNTS WHERE THE BRIBES GO!
“This is decades and decades of failures,” experts say of the persistent homelessness crisis that continues to plague California.
Kayla Haskell, homeless outreach specialist with Pathways to Housing DC, from right, interviews David Putney, 64, who has been homeless for two years, near the McPherson Square Metro Station in Washington on Jan. 22.Katherine Frey / The Washington Post via Getty Images
Pelosi, Spier, Feinstein, Newsom on the take from Developers and Real Estate Lobbies. Homelessness will never end in California until bribery is eliminated. FEINSTEIN MAKES HER BIG BUCKS OFF CBRE REAL ESTATE! MODERN FORENSICS TRACES ALL OF THEIR SECRET BANK AND STOCK ACCOUNTS WHERE THE BRIBES GO!
By Alicia Victoria Lozano
LOS ANGELES — The only thing that kept LaRae Cantley going was her three children.
She grew up surrounded by poverty and addiction, but despite her difficulties, she never expected to be homeless.
Yet one day in the late 1990s, a sheriff’s deputy knocked on the door of her South Los Angeles house and told her and her husband they had five minutes to vacate the property. Cantley was stunned. She knew nothing about her husband’s finances and had no idea he skimped on rent.
With nowhere to go, she sent their three children to live with the children’s great-grandparents. She and her husband divorced, and she found herself homeless.
Many blame mental illness and drug addiction for the soaring numbers, but experts say that is only part of the puzzle. The state’s severe housing shortage that has forced rents to increase at twice the rate of the national average and put the median price of a single family home at $615,000, has also contributed to the crisis.
John Maceri, CEO of the Los Angeles-based social services provider The People Concern, said social safety nets, like affordable housing and job training, are all but gone, leaving already vulnerable people to fend for themselves.
“You reap what you sow,” Maceri said recently.
He was one of 300 volunteers who gathered in Santa Monica last week for an annual homeless count, part of a larger effort in Los Angeles County that spanned three days and covered thousands of square miles. Similar counts took place in San Francisco, San Diego and other parts of the country.
The federally mandated survey stretches to every nook and cul-de-sac. Its mission is simple: using U.S. census tracts, count every person who appears to be experiencing homelessness and report those numbers to the county. The county tallies them up using statistical analysis and sends them to the state, which sends a report to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Similar to the census, the federal government doles out resources based on these findings. Cities and counties with the most need typically get the most money.
In Santa Monica, an idyllic coastal oasis in Southern California, the count took on the air of a community fair. Parking attendants ushered hundreds people into St. Monica Catholic Church on a Wednesday night, offering warm drinks and snacks to volunteers who greeted one another. The crowd filled with local residents and city officials was thick with anticipation.
Around 11 p.m., hundreds of volunteers, lawmakers and law enforcement officers embarked on what has become routine for the affluent community. The city was an early adopter of the count, said former mayor and current state Assemblyman Richard Bloom.
The Democrat served three terms as Santa Monica’s mayor when homelessness still felt like a local problem. The city, with its soft beaches and year-round sunshine, had always been a magnet for homeless people. Residents and outsiders sang a familiar refrain: People experiencing homelessness were drawn to Santa Monica’s comfortable environment and abundant social services.
“Homelessness has been here for decades,” Bloom said. “But for many of those decades, we really didn’t see it as much as we do today.”
Experts say these fluctuations reflect the issue’s complexity and enormity.
“This is decades and decades of failures,” said Heidi Martson, interim executive director of the homeless services authority. “It’s going to take time.”
One of the biggest failures has been state and local leaders’ inability or unwillingness to address the high cost of housing. Nearly half of Los Angeles County residents pay 50 percent of their income on rent, according to the housing authority. Even building affordable housing in Los Angeles was estimated in2016 to cost $414,000 for a two-bedroom unit, according to a city of Los Angeles report “Comprehensive Homelessness Strategy.”
Los Angeles County finds housing for 130 people every day, yet 150 people fall into homelessness daily, according to the authority.
Neither move came with social safety nets, such as job training and mental health treatment, to ensure these people would land on their feet, said Alise Orduña, Santa Monica’s senior adviser on homelessness.
“We needed to help people readjust to society,” she said.
Cantley said she first signed up for housing through the city in 1998, but didn’t receive it until 2012. After spending more than a decade on the street, she found herself at odds with the walls and routines thrust on her.
It took her three years of “damage control” to adjust, she said. She’s not alone. In recent years, a new trend has emerged among service providers to pair formerly homeless people with support services.
For Cantley, that meant counseling for domestic abuse and depression, she said. Now, she is an advocate and activist who works with others with similar experiences. But not all people enduring homelessness are able to access those types of resources.
Mike Sanders spent six years in prison for robbery before his release in 2015. During his time behind bars, his mother died and the rest of his family became financially unstable. With no money and no job, Sanders, 43, became homeless. He slept on skid row in downtown Los Angeles for awhile, but it was too dangerous, he said. Church steps and shelters felt safer.
Eventually, he signed up for housing through The People Concern and found a stable home three years later, he said. Now, he lives in a former hotel near 5th and Spring streets downtown, he said.
“I love it,” Sanders said of his home. “I don’t have to share my room, my bathroom, with no one.”
Still, Sanders does not work. His income filters in through panhandling and the state’s General Assistance program. He spends his days circling downtown in a wheelchair, getting food and cash where he can.
The Bay Area’s dynasties and Dianne Feinstein’s CBRE Realty go to great lengths to keep affordable housing out of California.
Some of them pay epic covert bribes range from small family businesses to juggernauts—and include everything from philanthropy to sex scandal, all from some of America’s wealthiest families.
Here’s a look at 5 headline-making bloodlines.
1. Sobrato Cartel, Founded: 1979 The Founder: John A. Sobrato (pictured) History: John A. Sobrato’s father, John Massimo Sobrato, owned a famous Italian restaurant in San Francisco. When he died, John’s mother Ann sold the restaurant for $75k and invested the proceeds in South Bay properties. John took over the business in the early 1960s before starting his own company, the Sobrato Organization, in 1979. Famous Members: John’s son, John M. Sobrato, is the CEO of the family business, while John remains chairman. Sue Sobrato, John’s wife of 50+ years, is a trustee, along with daughters Sheri and Lisa, and Lisa’s husband Matthew Sonsini. The Latest: Following in the footsteps of Ann Sobrato, the charitable family has donated more than $300M to local nonprofits since starting a family foundation in 1996. The Sobrato Family Foundation, set up by daughter Lisa, has provided 68 nonprofit organizations with more than 333k SF of operating space, at a value of roughly $5.5M. John and Sue, along with their son John M., have also signed giving pledges promising 100% of their wealth—an estimated $6B to date – to charity either during their lifetime or upon their death. Famous Properties: The Sobrato Organization owns 7.5M SF of office space in Silicon Valley, with tenants like Apple, Yahoo and Netflix. The firm also owns 6,600 apartments.
2. Shorenstein Cartel, Founded: 1960 The Founder: Walter Shorenstein History: Walter Shorenstein bought Shorenstein Co (then named Milton Meyer & Co) in 1960. He changed the name in 1989. Famous Members: Walter’s son Doug (pictured) ran the company until this past November, when he lost his battle with cancer. Walter’s daughter Carol Shorenstein Hays is a Tony Award-winning theater producer many times over. The Latest: Doug, known for his uncanny instincts regarding real estate, turned the company into a powerhouse, with the firm boasting over 70 properties in 13 cities, including LA, Portland, New York and San Francisco. Walter and his wife also started the Joan Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government in honor of their late daughter Joan, who was a journalist at the Washington Post and CBS News. Walter passed away in 2010 at the age of 95. Famous Properties: Under Doug’s leadership the company purchased such high-profile properties as Miami’s Wachovia Financial Center (formerly First Union Financial Center), and the Starrett-Lehigh Building in New York. Other iconic investments include Chicago’s John Hancock Tower and New York’s Park Avenue Tower. Fun Fact: Walter Shorenstein and a group of investors bought the San Francisco Giants in 1992 for $100M, and Walter acted as an adviser to Presidents Johnson and Carter.
3. Bechtel Cartel, Founded: 1898 The Founder: Warren A. Bechtel (pictured with his wife, Clara) History: Warren started Bechtel engineering and construction company when he was just 25 years old and nearly bankrupt, with a new baby on the way. Famous Members: When Warren died unexpectedly, he was succeeded by his son Stephen Bechtel Sr., who became chief executive of the Hoover Dam project. His son Stephen D. Bechtel Jr. took over in 1960 and ran the company until 1989, when he handed it over to his son Riley. The Latest: Riley stepped down as CEO in 2014, and today the company is run by his son Brendan, who is president and COO. That’s five generations. The company has 58,000 employees in nearly 50 countries. Famous Properties: The firm is known for such iconic projects as the Hoover Dam, the Channel Tunnel, Crossrail London and the Tacoma Narrows Bridge.
4. Berg Cartel, Founded: 1997 The Founder: Carl and Clyde Berg Famous Members: Brothers Clyde and Carl founded Berg & Berg Enterprises and developed campuses for some of Silicon Valley’s most prominent companies. A former partner of John Sobrato, Carl Berg acquired Mission West properties REIT in 1997 and sold it in 2012 to developer Divco West for $1.3B. But he’s not out of the real estate game. He still owns Microsoft’s Mountain View campus (pictured) and some buildings leased to Apple. In fact, Microsoft is planning an expansion for its campus. The Latest: Carl’s brother Clyde has had a challenging few years, battling in court with his estranged wife. The judge ultimately declared Berg “factually innocent” and dismissed the case as an “elaborate fraud.” Famous Properties: Microsoft campus, Apple, Silver Creek Business Park/Ciena Campus, and Orchard Trimble.
5. Wallace Cartel, Founded: 1928 The Founder: William S. Wallace and William Edwin “Ed” Wallace Famous Members: Father-son duo William and Ed Wallace opened Wallace Realtors in 1928. At the time William was a hospital manager and father of six, who had dabbled in real estate for most of his life, and Ed was a recent UC Berkeley grad with a background in the cleaning and dyeing industry. Ed’s son Clark joined the company business in 1958 after spending three years in the Navy. He runs the company today. Famous Properties: Notable deals include the sale of the 5,000 remaining acres of the 8,000-acre Moraga ranch to Utah Construction and Mining Co for $4M in 1953. He also sold the 108-acre Moraga Center to Bruzzone in 1964 and 2,300 more acres of Moraga to Bruzzone in 1967. Clark began developing projects on his own in 1974, including the Country Club and Sanders Ranch in Moraga, and the Pine Grove office complex and Orinda Theater project in Orinda.
Family dynasties own hit-man bloggers, crooked law firms and bribery outlets that they use to control politicians.
David Rockefeller’s bag man on the West Coast was James Bronkema, now dead. The Rockefellers have a large covert operation in California and spend billions buying politicians like Newsom, Feinstein and Pelosi!
Read more at: https://www.bisnow.com/san-francisco/news/commercial-real-estate/5-san-francisco-bay-area-real-estate-dynasties-56491?utm_source=CopyShare&utm_medium=Browser
The country’s largest social media companies are allowing the Chinese Communist Party to disseminate propaganda to American audiences with little oversight or warning, according to an ongoing congressional investigation into these companies’ failure to police suspect content.
Investigators with the House Foreign Affairs Committee have been pressing Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube to deplatform Chinese Communist Party officials and news outlets for disseminating propaganda, particularly related to the coronavirus, but each of the sites has failed to take adequate action. In most cases, Communist Party propaganda freely circulates on these sites without labels identifying the information as questionable.
While each of these sites has begun aggressively policing conservative provocateurs and even President Donald Trump, they have been lax about applying the same standards to Chinese officials and state-controlled news outlets that regularly traffic in unfounded conspiracy theories, congressional officials with knowledge of the investigation told the Washington Free Beacon. In many cases, these websites allowed communist leaders and outlets to post outright lies about the coronavirus pandemic, including the claim that American military leaders created the coronavirus and planted it in China.
The investigation, run by House Foreign Affairs Committee leader Rep. Michael McCaul (R., Texas), is part of a broader effort by congressional leaders to crack down on China’s influence operations in the United States.
The findings of the investigation were presented in the form of report cards grading each company on whether it has banned communist officials and news outlets, applied warning labels to their content, and fact-checked their claims for accuracy. All of the websites failed these tests: Twitter received a D-, Facebook a C+, and YouTube a C-, grades that imply each still permits the dissemination of anti-U.S. communist propaganda, often without warning labels for readers.
“The Chinese Communist Party has weaponized American social media platforms to push their disinformation and promote their propaganda. The solution is simple—deplatform CCP officials and propagandists who consistently spread lies,” McCaul told the Free Beacon. “Sadly, while we had some positive conversations and some steps have been taken, these companies have chosen to allow CCP officials to continue to operate on their sites instead of doing what’s right.”
McCaul’s team first started investigating these sites in March, when he petitioned them to ban Communist Party officials and state-controlled news outlets for their dissemination of lies about the coronavirus pandemic.
Twitter emerged as the most abused platform and also the one with the least oversight. While the company cooperated with McCaul’s probe, it did not remove any of the propaganda posts identified by the congressional investigators.
“Despite a willingness to discuss HFAC Minority staff concerns, Twitter does not appear to have removed any CCP disinformation from its platform nor made any meaningful policy changes in response to our concerns to prevent the CCP from spreading propaganda on its platform,” according to the investigation. “Moreover, Twitter does not label or provide transparency about the nature and operations of CCP propaganda outlets. Rather, it legitimizes them by allowing them to operate as verified users.”
While average Chinese citizens are blocked from accessing Twitter due to the country’s strict censorship policies, Communist Party officials are often verified by the website, providing legitimacy to their claims. McCaul’s team maintains this violates Twitter’s own policies barring individuals and organizations guilty of gross human rights violations from operating accounts on the site.
Additionally, Twitter does not equally apply its rules. Prominent conservatives, including Trump, have had their content censored or removed in recent months. But Chinese officials and news outlets are not held to a similar standard.
“Of all the companies we engaged with, Twitter is the platform most heavily abused by the CCP,” investigators found. “Twitter only applied a factcheck label to the Tweet about the virus originating with the U.S. military after it had been on the platform for more than a month. They are the most unwilling to do anything to stop the CCP from spreading harmful misinformation or provide transparency through labels that inform users they are viewing content from a state-funded or state-directed media outlet.”
Twitter has said that it will only fact-check tweets from prominent voices, such as the president. Congressional investigators remain concerned that China does not rank as a top priority for the website.
Facebook also allows several Chinese state-controlled propaganda organs to freely post misinformation, potentially reaching millions of Americans. These outlets include China Daily, Xinhua, and CGTN, all of which are leading purveyors of Chinese government-approved propaganda.
Facebook received the highest grade awarded, a C+, due to its efforts to specifically inform readers they are consuming state-funded information. It still permits these outlets to freely post content on its site, however.
Facebook does not “currently plan to take down content flagged by the staff or take sufficient action to prevent the CCP from using Facebook to spread propaganda and lies about COVID-19,” according to the report.
YouTube demonstrated similar failures. It does not block communist officials and news outlets or remove their materials. YouTube does, however, attempt to fact-check and police this content for inaccuracies.
“YouTube does label videos by CCP propaganda outlets, but the labeling is inconsistent,” according to the report.
In many cases, YouTube failed to label CCP content as propaganda and did not provide viewers with complete information about the biased nature of these videos.
SILICON VALLEY BRIBERY TACTIC: PAYING BRIBES TO GET YOUR SNOT NOSED KID INTO STANFORD AND YALE:
Google has faced more scrutiny from antitrust regulators in Europe than in the United States
With a handful of US technology giants growing more powerful and dominant, debate is intensifying on whether big tech’s growth is healthy or not.
Over the past few years, Apple, Google parent Alphabet, Facebook and Amazon have become among the world’s most valuable companies.
Along with stalwarts like Microsoft and rising stars like Netflix, the tech firms exercise enormous control over what people see and how they live.
Increasingly, policymakers and others have begun to consider breaking up or regulating the biggest technology companies, although imminent action appears unlikely.
While many consumers welcome innovation from the tech sector, critics have complained about the power of “gatekeepers” of information and other content.
Google holds around 90 percent of the internet search market in the United States and Europe. Facebook and Google scoop up some 60 percent of digital ad revenues and are eating up 90 percent of new ad growth in the United States.
Google’s Android and Apple’s iOS power the overwhelming majority of mobile devices. Amazon accounts for nearly half of US online sales and is expanding into new sectors.
– Concentration of power –
Barry Lynn, executive director of the Open Markets Institute, said three firms — Google, Facebook and Amazon — “have more power than any previous monopolies we’ve dealt with in the past century.”
“We have to be incredibly concerned about the power of Facebook, Google and Amazon,” said Lynn, who launched his research center last month after his team was ousted from the Google-funded New America Foundation.
“They have their hands on the flow of news, the flow of books and they are manipulating that flow in a conscious way to promote their interests.”
Even though the idea of taking on the tech giants appears extreme, the upheaval in US politics over the past year has brought together allies from across the spectrum worried about their concentration of economic power.
The domination in online advertising of Facebook and Google has raised concerns about a digital duopoly
The recently formed “New Center” political alliance that includes leaders from the traditional right and left has placed “challenging big tech” on its agenda.
Bill Galston, a former White House advisor under Bill Clinton and co-founder of New Center, argued that tech monopolies are hurting wages, entrepreneurship and could be distorting the political landscape.
“The big tech firms have almost unlimited funds they can throw into lobbying, and they have been ramping this up steeply,” Galston said. “Is that a good thing for democracy?”
Lou Kerner, partner at the investment firm Flight Ventures, said this monopoly power is more concentrated than any in recent history, and expressed concern it will “strangle innovation” and increase income inequality.
But Kerner said he opposes heavy-handed regulation or breakup of the tech giants.
“By their nature regulators move slowly and by the time they address the problems they are no longer problems,” Kerner said.
“Historically the market has been much better at addressing monopoly powers in technology.”
– Rewriting the book –
Ed Black, president of the Computer & Communications Industry Association, which represents firms including Google, Facebook and Microsoft, said breaking up the tech giants could have a “chilling effect on innovation.”
“If our goal is really to maintain innovation, spur the entire economy, and grow higher paying jobs, asking the government to penalize a successful foundational economic sector, absent bad behavior or consumer harm, seems illogical,” Black said.
European regulators have taken a more aggressive approach, imposing a hefty fine on Google after concluding the search giant illegally favored its own shopping services, one of three antitrust investigations into the company.
Amazon has become the dominant online retailer as it has expanded into other sectors such as streaming video and groceries
In Washington, the rise of Donald Trump suggests a possible shift in US policy after years in which Silicon Valley was seen as close to the White House.
Former White House strategist Steve Bannon said recently he was leading an effort within the administration to turn Facebook and Google into “public utilities.”
But Federal Trade Commission chief Maureen Ohlhausen, who would lead any US antitrust action, signaled any effort to break up tech firms is remote.
“Given the clear consumer benefits of technology-driven innovation, I am concerned about the push to adopt an approach that will disregard consumer benefits in the pursuit of other perhaps even conflicting goals,” Ohlhausen said in a speech at Georgetown University.
She said some tech critics want “to rewrite the modern rules” of antitrust enforcement to “pursue a wide variety of goals other than consumer welfare.”
HOW THE PUBLIC OFFICIALS WERE BRIBED IN THIS CASE
– “DARK MONEY” IS THE WAY THAT CORRUPT POLITICAL CRIMINALS EXCHANGE COMPENSATION, BRIBES AND INFLUENCE WITHOUT THE FBI CATCHING THEM
– This is about a group of tech oligarchs, and their corrupt Senators, who commit crimes in order to manipulate over a trillion tax dollars (YOUR MONEY) into their, and their friends pockets.
– They are felons yet they control some of the offices of the agencies who are supposed to arrest them. Silicon Valley bought K Street and U.S. Senators, gave them more Dark Money than history has ever seen and then had giant tech-law firms bribe, hit-job and blockade any attempts to solve the problem.
– Some of the largest bribes in American history were paid via billions of dollars of pre-IPO cleantech stock, insider trading, real estate, Google search engine rigging and shadow-banning, sex workers, revolving door jobs, nepotism, state-supported black-listing of competitors and under-the-table cash. Why are these Silicon Valley Oligarchs and their K-Street law firms and lobbyists immune from the law?
U.S. Senators, Agency Heads and Congress are bribed with:
– Billions of dollars of Google, Twitter, Facebook, Tesla, Netflix and Sony Pictures stock and stock warrants which is never reported to the FEC
– Billions of dollars of Google, Twitter, Facebook, Tesla, Netflix and Sony Pictures search engine rigging and shadow-banning which is never reported to the FEC
– Free rent
– Prostitutes and Rent Boys
– Party Financing
– Sports Event Tickets
– Campaign Services “Donations”
– Secret PAC Financing
– Jobs in Corporations in Silicon Valley For The Family Members of Those Who Take Bribes And Those Who Take Bribes, Themselves
– “Consulting” contracts from McKinsey as fronted pay-off gigs
– Overpriced “Speaking Engagements” which are really just pay-offs conduited for donors
– Private jet rides and use of Government fuel depots (ie: Google handed out NASA jet fuel to staff)
– Real Estate
– The use of Cayman, Boca Des Tores, Swiss and related laundering accounts
– The use of HSBC, Wells Fargo and Deustche Bank money laundering accounts
– Free spam and bulk mailing services owned by corporations
– Use of high tech law firms such as Perkins Coie, Wilson Sonsini, MoFo, Covington & Burling, etc. to conduit bribes to officials
David Brock’s Media Matters gave a $930,000 cash grant to David Brock’s Franklin Education Forum
David Brock’s Franklin Education Forum credited the Bonner Group for raising those funds, triggering the 12.5% commission
David Brock paid the Bonner Group a $124,250 commission to solicit a cash grant … from himself!
IT DOESN’T STOP THERE
After the Franklin Education Forum retained $869,750, they sent a $816,224 cash grant to David Brock’s The Franklin Forum:
Note: The ‘Franklin Education Forum’ is a 501(c)3, and ‘The Franklin Forum’ is a 501(c)4. They are not the same company.
Since The Franklin Forum 501(c)4 paid Bonner a commission in 2013, it’s safe to assume fundraiser received a $102,028 commission in 2014. Unfortunately, it’s hard to tell for sure. They still haven’t filed their taxes for 2014!
Say, for example, you donate $1,062,857 to Media Matters for America. This is how David Brock would have used your charitable donation in 2014:
In the end, Brock’s solicitor would have pocketed $350,825, almost a third of your initial donation! That’s a far cry from the advertised 12.5% commission.
As bizarre as that scenario may sound, this is exactly what David Brock did in 2014.
HOW CAN WE BE SURE THIS IS INTENTIONAL?
David Brock is the Chairman for each of these organizations! How could he not know what’s going on?
He’s a hands-on Chairman. According to their tax returns, Brock allocates time, weekly, to his organizations:
Furthermore, the New York Times reports that David Brock shares a summer rental in the Hamptons with Mary Pat Bonner, the President of the Bonner Group!
David Brock will have a hard time claiming ignorance on this. These transfers are intentional. He vacations with his solicitor. Case closed.
STILL NOT CONVINCED?
David Brock didn’t even bother to give his organizations different phone numbers. They all share the same phone number!
We even located the Bonner Group’s solicitation agreement with Media Matters on Florida’s Gift Givers’ Guide. Clarification on their commission can be found on page 2:
In English: Contractually, David Brock has the option to exclude certain contributions from triggering the commission. In spite of this option, he intentionally chooses to trigger the 12.5% commission for money grants between his organizations.
Note: Yes, we are making the assumption that all of Brock’s organizations have the same solicitation agreement with the Bonner Group. Given that his organizations share the same address, board members, and telephone number, we feel it’s safe to assume they also share the same solicitation agreement.
THIS BARELY SCRATCHES THE SURFACE
Utilizing public facing tax returns, along with records submitted to the FEC, we mapped out all the significant money transfers from 2014 that took place in Brock’s office:
This is all from just one year!
I have been asking myself lately; how were there so many corrupt people in the Obama Administration? The only answer I can come up with is that Barack Obama himself was a very corrupt person. Who else would have had so many corrupt people that he chose or tolerated in his Administration.
Do you remember Lois Lerner from the IRS and Barack Obama asking her to go after his political rivals using the most feared government agencies, the IRS. The last place you want to be is between the government and your money.
Obama Attorney General Eric Holder who was found in Contempt of Congress for lying to Congress and looking the other way on every illegal act Obama or someone in his administration perpetrated.
Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, earned his spot among Obama’s corrupt appointees thanks to his admitted role in the “green energy” scams, specifically the Solyndra scandal in which the Obama gave more than $500 million to a failed company and one of its key investors, Obama backer George Kaiser.
Do not forget Obama’s corrupt cabinet appointee Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius. According to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, she was guilty of violating the Hatch Act by campaigning for the president in her official capacity. Violators of this act are normally fired, but Obama would not allow his AG Eric Holder to do any such thing. So Sibelius got off without punishment after claiming she said she “… got a little caught up in the notion that the gains which had been made would clearly not continue without the president’s reelection…”
I am not even going into the details of the corrupt John Brennan former CIA Director and James Clapper Director of National Intelligence.
And let us not forget about the most corrupt person Obama appointed and that was Hillary Clinton.
After thinking about all of the people above how could we not think Obama himself was the Godfather of this mob?
Now let us add another and that is James Comey, former disgraced FBI Director. Politico is reporting that on Friday night the FBI released a two-page summary former disgraced FBI Director James Comey used to brief then President-elect Donald Trump on the “dossier” about Trump’s ties to Russia. ( https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-uncovers-doj-records-showing-numerous-bruce-ohr-communications-with-fusion-gps-and-christopher-steele/ )
The document, asserts that Christopher Steele, the person who compiled the dossier, was working “on behalf of private clients” in his investigation of Trump’s possible ties to Russia. Comey was not honest to the court because Steele was actually working for the DNC and Clinton campaign. Comey also did not inform the court or President-Elect Trump Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party paid the Russian government via Steele and Fusion GPS for the opposition research document. Why didn’t Comey inform the court or President-Elect Trump that the information came from the Russian government: because then he would be admitting that the true collusion was between Hillary, the Democratic Party and Russia.
No matter which political party corruption is found in we must drain the swamp of all these corrupt people and prosecute them if we actually want to improve the political climate in the United States.
The key suspects under investigation for the crimes, attacks on the public and manipulation of Democracy include:
Amy Pascal; Bill Daley; Bill Lockyer; Brian Goncher; Daniel Cohen; David Axelrod; David Drummond; David Plouffe; David E. Shaw; Dianne Feinstein; Elon Musk; Eric Holder; Eric Schmidt; John Zaccarro, Jr.; Frank Giustra; Nick Denton; Harry Reid; Haim Saban; Hillary and Bill Clinton; Ira Ehrenpreis; Jay Carney; James Comey; Jared Cohen; Jeffrey Katzenberg; John Doerr; Harvey Weinstein; Yasmin Green; Jonathan Silver; Ken Brody; Lachlan Seward; Judge Stewart M. Bernstein; Larry Page; Google; Alphabet; YouTube; Facebook; In-Q-Tel; Amazon; Twitter; WordPress.Org; The Law Firm of Perkins Coi; Mark Zuckerberg; Martin LaGod; Matt Rogers; Marc Benioff; Michael Birch; S. Donald Sussman; Pierre Omidyar; Rahm Emanual; Raj Gupta; Ray Lane; Tom Perkins; Robert Rubin; Rob Friedman; Reid Hoffman; Richard Blum; Robert Gibbs; Robert Shwarts; Roger Altman; The Law Firm of Covington and Burling; Sanford Robertson; Steve Jurvetson; Steve Rattner; Steve Westly; Steven Chu; Steve Spinner; Susie Tompkins Buell; George Soros; Warren Buffet; Tom Steyer; The Clinton Foundation, Tim Draper; Valarie Jarrett; Jeffrey Epstein; Vinod Khosla; Michelle Lee; The law firm of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich and Rosatti; Lawrence Summers; Marc Andreessen Sheryl Sandberg; Yuri Milner; Fenwick & West LLP; James W. Breyer; McBee Strategic; Mike Sheehy; Nancy Pelosi; Gilman Louie; Thomas J. Kim; Ping Li; Greylock Capital, Accel Partners; Jim Swartz; Bank Menatep; Alisher Asmanov; Marc L. Andreessen; Peter Thiel; Clarion Capital; Richard Wolpert; Robert Ketterson; David Kilpatrick; Tesla Motors; Solyndra; BrightSource; IDG Capital Partners; Goldman Sachs; Morgan Stanley; State Street Corporation; JP Morgan Chase; Lloyd Blankfein; Jamie Dimon; Steve Cutler; Rodgin Cohen; Sullivan Cromwell, LLP; Jeff Markey; Steve McBee; Michael F. McGowan; Toni Townes-Whitley; CGI Federal; Todd Y. Park; Frank M. Sands, Sr.; Robin Yangong Li; Parker Zhang; Jonathan Goodman; Gawker Media; Jalopnik; Adrian Covert, John Herrman; Gizmodo Media; K2 Intelligence; WikiStrat; Podesta Group; Fusion GPS; Think Progress; Media Matters; Black Cube; Debbie Wasserman, The DNC Executive Committee; Correct The Record; Stratfor; ShareBlue; Sid Blumenthal; David Brock; Barack Obama; Sen. Robert Menendez; Jerry Brown; Ken Alex; Susan Rice; Kamala Harris; Bruce Ohr; Nellie Ohr; and other names to be identified in court…
These parties appear to have exploited taxpayer government resources to line their pockets at tax payer expense as proven by finance reports, FEC filings, Congressional studies, Panama Papers, espionage journalism, state election reporting forms, Goldman Sachs and ICIJ Swiss Leaks documents and journalists, on-staff whistle-blowers, covert accounts revelations, forensic audits, Congressional action comparison charts and other evidence. Connected on XKEYSCORE, FBI, Palantir, Linkedin and other investigative databases. Confirmed in cross-over financial dealings and transfers. Sourced as beneficiaries and financiers of the activities.
How Tesla, Google And Facebook Engage In Corruption And Pay Bribes
Corruption exists in every Silicon Valley major tech company, whether a frontier market, emerging market, or developed market. Corruption, whether legal or not, corrodes respect for the people in power and hurts people who aren’t willing to play along. The common types of corruption include:
A blacklist is a group of companies excluded from trade. A company may be added to a blacklist as punishment for refusing to pay a bribe or for using corrupt practices to get ahead. The World Bank maintains a blacklist of firms that aren’t eligible to participate in projects it funds because of bad practices.
Black market is a catchall term for illegal trade. Every country has a little bit of black-market activity, and it’s a big concern for investors because
Counterfeit and cut-rate intellectual property products — movies, music, or brand-name clothes, for example — can cheapen brand value and erode profits.
Legitimate competitors may have a tough time staying profitable and aboveboard.
Poor customer service by black-market vendors may make consumers reluctant to spend money with any company.
A high level of black-market activity may show entrepreneurial spirit that can be harnessed for good. Some black-market business owners are thrilled to go legit when a more stable or business-friendly environment emerges, and they often drive economic growth when they’re free to go aboveground. This is exactly what happened in Russia, China, and Eastern Europe.
Bribes and facilitation fees are exchanges of money or gifts to grease the wheels of commerce. Facilitation payments may be packs of cigarettes, small amouts of cash, or tchotchkes made willingly because they don’t cost a lot extra, and they help get the job done. A bribe is a large payment to someone with significant authority. Rather than $20 or a carton of cigarettes to a customs agent, the fee may be $20,000 to the chief of the customs agency.
If you think you’re being asked for a bribe but aren’t sure, say that you need a receipt for your taxes or for your boss back home. If you’re refused a receipt, you’re being asked for a bribe.
Campaign and charitable contributions are often legal payments used in corrupt fashion. In the Unites States, for example, a business that wants a law changed gains access to a key lawmaker by making a large campaign contribution or giving a sizable amount to the senator’s pet charity.
Collusion is the practice of vendors getting together to divide bids. Collusion can help businesses in emerging markets get new customers, but it can also cause a business to be shut out. If businesses don’t compete on their merits, the market distortion can hurt everyone.
Overpriced goods can be a form of indirect kickbacks. A company agrees to buy supplies at prices higher than market value. Sometimes, a business pays higher-than-normal prices when dealing with a related company, such as a subsidiary or a company with shared board members. This practice may create advantages in managing exchange rates and taxes, or it may just be a way of spreading around wealth that would otherwise go to the shareholders.
Camouflaging the bribe as a legitimate purchase launders the bribe into a tax-deductible, expense account–reimbursable form, but it’s still corruption.
Phantom jobs are held by employees who keep their job regardless of whether they show up or prove to be incompetent. Often an international company winning a contract may be required to hire a minimum number of local workers. This legitimate obligation provides the company with workers with local experience and the local economy with jobs. But when government officials request that the jobs be filled by people who receive a paycheck but don’t actually do any work, it’s expensive to the company and demoralizing to employees who do come to work and do a good job.
Industries that have the most corruption problems are construction, real estate, and oil and gas. All these industries tend to have contracts big in both scale and dollars. If you invest in these industries, you may run across anti-bribery restrictions more than in other sectors.
A Facebook contractor was paid thousands of dollars in bribes by a shady affiliate marketer to reactivate ad accounts that had been banned due to policy violations, a BuzzFeed News investigation has found. A company spokesperson confirmed that an unnamed worker was fired after inquiries from BuzzFeed News sparked an internal investigation.
BuzzFeed News has found that a Facebook contractor was paid thousands of dollars in bribes by a shady affiliate marketer to reactivate ad accounts that had been banned due to policy violations. From the report: A company spokesperson confirmed that an unnamed worker was fired after inquiries from BuzzFeed News sparked an internal investigation. The person in question was based in the company’s …
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, passed in 1977, has led to more than 500 cases covering activity in more than 100 countries. On this map, the darker red that a country appears, the larger the total penalties assessed for FCPA violations in that country.
MOST OF CONGRESS HAVE BEEN PAID BRIBES IN TESLA, FACEBOOK AND GOOGLE STOCK TO HALT INVESTIGATIONS INTO TESLA, FACEBOOK AND GOOGLE!
-THE VERY PEOPLE THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO INVESTIGATE TESLA, FACEBOOK AND GOOGLE OWN THE STOCK OF THOSE COMPANIES!
Social media exec faces questions about Cambridge Analytica scandal
Nearly 30 lawmakers hold stock in Facebook — including three who could soon be grilling its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, about a British company that usurped his firm’s data without user consent to possibly help steer elections.
Both panels, along with Senate Commerce, invited Zuckerberg to appear before them after reports that Cambridge Analytica, a British big data firm, obtained access to private information of millions of Facebook users under questionable circumstances. Cambridge Analytica reportedly incorporated the data in ad-targeting tools used by political campaigns including President Donald Trump’s winning 2016 bid.
Kennedy, through various trust funds, has at least $80,000 invested in Facebook, Schrader at least $15,000, and Whitehouse no less than $30,000.
Ten Democratic members, including Kennedy, sent a letter last Thursday to the Federal Trade Commission commending its investigation into Facebook’s data privacy practices.
“Congressman Kennedy’s stock holdings do not influence his work in Congress,” his office said in response to questions from Roll Call about his Facebook shares.
Schrader and Whitehouse did not respond to requests for comment.
Watch: A Guide to Roll Call’s Wealth of Congress
Other notable lawmakers also own a slice of Facebook — including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. Through her husband, the California Democrat holds at least $500,000 in the social media stock.
Texas Republican Rep. Michael McCaul reported at least $1 million in Facebook stock and some $30,000 in 2016 capital gains through his spouse and child.
Illinois Rep. Brad Schneider has at least $200,000 in the company through his wife’s IRA, while Rhode Island Rep. Jim Langevin, a fellow Democrat, holds stock worth at least $115,000 and had capital gains of more than $5,000, according to his 2016 financial disclosure. Ohio Republican Rep. James B. Renacci also owns at least $150,000 worth of Facebook stock.
Several lawmakers with holdings in the company say they recognize that new policies on social media oversight are needed after the latest developments.
“I have called for regulation on data and an internet bill [of] rights. I have said that self regulation is not sufficient,” Rep. Ro Khanna said in an email. The California Democrat listed Facebook stock worth at least $2,000 through a financial firm that manages his wife’s assets.
“The Facebook assets are held by my wife, not by me,” Khanna wrote in an email. “She has an independent financial management firm manage her assets and does not make decisions on what to buy or sell.”
Pelosi’s office also sought to put distance between the Democratic leader and her husband when asked about Facebook being listed on her disclosure.
“These investments are Mr. Pelosi’s not Leader Pelosi’s. Leader Pelosi plays no role in this investment and has no stock investments of her own,” an aide said.
Likes and dislikes
The “FB” ticker has been a financial boon to shareholders, with the stock price doubling over the last three years (the last two weeks notwithstanding).
Sen. John Hoeven owns more than $50,000 in Facebook stock. The North Dakota Republican’s office issued a statement that was straightforward about his investment, but also called for more accountability.
“Senator Hoeven owns Facebook and a variety of other popular technology stocks. … The senator believes that Facebook must be held accountable for its data privacy practices, including testifying before the relevant Congressional committees,” his office said.
But Rep. John Yarmuth wants nothing more to do with the company. The Kentucky Democrat is selling his shares, according to communications director Christopher Schuler.
And Wisconsin Republican freshman Mike Gallagher wants to entirely separate himself from individually-held stocks altogether.
“Rep. Gallagher hasn’t owned Facebook stock since prior to taking office,” his office said in a statement. “He sold all of his individual stocks in 2016 to avoid any appearance of impropriety (and questions like these).”
Watch: Book Sellers, Self Funders and 970 Liabilities For One Entry — Takeaways from Wealth of Congress
Kentucky GOP Rep. James R. Comer, who owns at least $1,000 in Facebook stock, defended the company.
“I have not had anyone complain about Facebook to me. Facebook is one of the main sources of communication in Kentucky,” he said.
Florida Republican Rep. Tom Rooney told Roll Call in an email sent by his staff that he thought he only owned stock in McDonald’s and suggested Roll Call was confusing him with his Florida colleague, Republican Francis Rooney. (Tom Rooney holds Facebook shares as part of a family trust, according to Roll Call’s research, as does Francis Rooney through Rooney Family Investments, Ltd.)
“If Facebook and all social media disappeared from the planet, it wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world,” said Tom Rooney, who is retiring after this term.
As Zuckerberg’s testimony nears, Roll Call will be monitoring members buying or selling shares in his company.
Here are all the members of Congress who listed Facebook holdings in their 2016 financial disclosures, along with the minimum worth of their stocks and of any capital gains or dividends.
The indictment alleged that the parents engaged in a conspiracy to launder bribespaid to Singer “by funneling them through Singer’s purported charity and his for-profit corporation.”  This third charge has a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, supervised release of three years, and a $500,000 fine.
Jan 31, 2020Airbus, Europe’s largest aerospace multinational, is to pay a record £3bn in penalties after admitting it had paid huge bribes on an “endemic” basis to land contracts in 20 countries.. Anti …
General Motors and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles have reportedly reached an agreement to purchase federal greenhouse gas credits from Tesla. While it’s common knowledge that the electric carmaker has raked in revenue by selling credits for years, disclosures with the State of Delaware help paint a clearer picture. Apparently, GM filed to buy credits from Tesla earlier […]
Apr 30, 2018Panasonic has agreed to pay $280 million in penalty charges that stem from violations of a federal anti-bribery law, the US government said Monday. … Tesla and Panasonic are working on a new ..
Over time, corruption has been defined differently. For example, in a simple context, while performing work for a government or as a representative, it is unethical to accept a gift. Any free gift could be construed as a scheme to lure the recipient towards some biases. In most cases, the gift is seen as an intention to seek certain favors such as work promotion, tipping in order to win a contract, job or exemption from certain tasks in the case of junior employee giving the gift to a senior employee who can be key in winning the favor.
Some forms of corruption – now called “institutional corruption” – are distinguished from bribery and other kinds of obvious personal gain. A similar problem of corruption arises in any institution that depends on financial support from people who have interests that may conflict with the primary purpose of the institution.
An illegal act by an officeholder constitutes political corruption only if the act is directly related to their official duties, is done under color of law or involves trading in influence. The activities that constitute illegal corruption differ depending on the country or jurisdiction. For instance, some political funding practices that are legal in one place may be illegal in another. In some cases, government officials have broad or ill-defined powers, which make it difficult to distinguish between legal and illegal actions. Worldwide, bribery alone is estimated to involve over 1 trillion US dollars annually. A state of unrestrained political corruption is known as a kleptocracy, literally meaning “rule by thieves”.
Investigations by the United States Congress have shown that The U.S. Department of Energy, SSA, HUD, IRS, EPA, and other agencies, are used as political slush funds to pay back (In Plain Sight) campaign finance millionaires.
Corrupt politicians steer payola to campaign financiers while blockading the Silicon Valley oligarch’s competitors from reaching the market or receiving funding. Jury and FBI-compliant evidence proves this as fact. The White House has total and covert control over those agencies and can order any federal agency to screw over any voter if that citizen “mouths off”. The Lois Lerner case, and thousands of similar cases, prove that!
In every case, the only entities who participated in the global character assassination and propaganda-media defamation reprisal attacks were those entities owned and controlled by the attackers. Jury and FBI-compliant evidence proves this as fact. Follow-the-money and the proof is quite clear.
The suspects have hired the largest numbers of lobbyists and corporate manipulation lawyers in U.S. history in order to manipulate political decisions. Jury and FBI-compliant evidence proves this as fact.
The suspects have spent more money on political bribes than any group of men has spent in the last century. Jury and FBI-compliant evidence proves this as fact.
The suspects placed top federal law enforcement and agency bosses from their own Cartel, into top government positions, with orders to run cover and protection schemes for them. Jury and FBI-compliant evidence proves this as fact.
California State officials including the Governor, Controller, The Senators, Secretary of State and regional officials participated in these crimes and pocketed the initial profits from these crimes in covert investment banking. Jury and FBI-compliant evidence proves this as fact.
Tesla Motors, Google, Netflix, Facebook, Linkedin, Amazon and other tech Cartel members operate with a common goal of psychological mass ideology manipulation and monopolistic profiteering based on government sponsored anti-trust violations and server control exclusivity. Jury and FBI-compliant evidence proves this as fact.
The Silicon Valley oligarchs campaign contributions to individual federal candidates are well-documented, with each contribution limited to $2,700 (of visible cash) per cycle to each candidate or their personal political action committee.
But political influence from outside groups, for example via Google’s massive army of lobbyists and crooked law firms, is far more than just cold hard cash in the form of direct campaign contributions. A large portion of the people who run political election programs, ie: “Campaign Managers” are no more than mobsters who run various financial shake-down and transparency evasion efforts.
The Washington Post reports on many bribery matters, for example, that the Palo Alto Mafia of High Tech billionaires has donated less than $4 million publicly visible dollars to members of Congress in the last 18 years…. BUT.. In an era where some Senate races cost nearly $100 million, $4 million seems like very little. Here are other ways the Palo Alto Mafia of High Tech billionaires bribe their way into policy and politics:
The Palo Alto Mafia of High Tech billionaires also give to party committees and the national party. A maxed-out donation to the national party quickly increases campaign spending to more than $100,000. Any organization – or person – can also give $33,400 to a party committee. Finally, state and local parties can each receive a $10,000, quickly allowing campaign finance totals to sour to nearly half-a-million dollars.
While the organization has to follow campaign limits, its members can make their own political donations, also following campaign finance limits noted above. But with millions of members, political clout builds quickly. The Palo Alto Mafia of High Tech billionaires have people like Steve Spinner and Steve Westly who use computerized manipulation systems to get members to over donate.
The Palo Alto Mafia of High Tech billionaires has a politically active membership on the social networks they own. With more than five million members, the Facebook and Google constantly communicates with its members about immigration and climate issues that affect the Palo Alto Mafia of High Tech billionaires stock market holdings and advising them how to vote. The organization is also constantly increasing its voter rolls by registering people to vote.
The Palo Alto Mafia of High Tech billionaires also activates its membership when elected officials are facing climate-related legislation, resulting in phone calls and emails and letters to Congress. In addition, lawmakers’ votes are noted and advertised to their issue-oriented membership.
The Palo Alto Mafia of High Tech billionaires has its a massive number of their own super PAC’s and 501c4 political organization which can run hundreds of their own political campaigns. The groups combined spent more than $40 million in the midterm elections on Senate and Congressional candidates, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. A lot of that money was spent on political advertising on television, radio and digital, and on direct mail.
The Palo Alto Mafia of High Tech billionaires tip off Senator’s staff as to which stocks to have their Goldman Sachs brokers buy and which laws to manipulate that will pump those stocks that the families of Sen. Reid, Harris, Pelosi, Feinstein, etc. have already insider traded. Why do you think Nancy Pelosi and Dianne Feinstein have $100M in their bank accounts from only a $170K per year salary? (ie: If Tesla Motors went bankrupt would Nancy Pelosi and Dianne Feinstein, who own covert stock in Musk’s companies, go bankrupt?)
Political attackers spend over $30M, part of that using taxpayer resources, attacking each victim that exposes them. This is proven in the financial transaction records from hired attackers: Google, Gawker, Gizmodo, Jalopnik, Think Progress, Media Matters, Facebook shadow-banning, troll farms, Media Matters, Black Cube, Fusion GPS, et al. (All of whom are now being forced out of business by federal and public investigations). Jury and FBI-compliant evidence proves the assertions. Hiring services, that wipe out a Senator’s adversaries, is an overt form of bribery and Dark Money financing by Oligarchs.
There are hundreds of other such examples…
Senior White House staffer Steve Rattner was indicted for stock market securities fraud, Former President’s campaign manager and Uber executive David Plouffe has been fined $90,000 for illegally bribing Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel (Obama’s former Chief of Staff, on behalf of the ride-hailing company, the Chicago Tribune reports.
In another case, White House buddies Marty Nesbitt and Harreld Kirkpatrick III formed a private equity investment firm called Vistria created to interface to the 2012 election.
A curious pattern began to emerge. The White House administration would attack industries with government power, which led to substantially lower valuations for these companies. Nesbitt and Vistria, or others close to the White House, could then acquire those assets for pennies on the dollar. For example: The for-profit higher education schools like University of Phoenix, ITT Technical Institute, and DeVry University; In 2013, White House staff blamed the schools for taking advantage of students by saddling them with student debt, ruining their credit and making a profit on it. The White House ordered the Federal Trade Commission to go after them. In the case of the University of Phoenix, its parent Apollo Education Group was suspended after a Federal Trade Commission investigation in 2015. The following year, three companies, including Vistria, swooped in to buy what remained of Apollo at a price 90% below its share price before the investigation. As Vistria’s education investment portfolio bulged, a number of White House Education Department officials, including Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, ended up taking high-level jobs with Vistria.
In another instance both the Vice President and Secretary of State were deeply involved in trade and security talks with China even as that country began its aggressive campaign to expand its military and physical presence in the South China Sea. Contrary to standard diplomatic practice, however, both played “good cop,” not seriously confronting China on its misbehavior. These two officials were close friends from their years spent together in the Senate. Their families went into business together in 2009. They created a number of equity and real estate investment firms allied to Rosemont Capital, the alternative investment fund of the Heinz Family Office. Over the next seven years, as the Vice President and Secretary of State negotiated sensitive and high-stakes deals with foreign governments, Rosemont entities secured a series of exclusive deals with those same foreign governments. In December of 2013, for instance, when one of those politicians traveled to China for talks. He brought his family along. While there, the father soft-pedaled China’s clear aggression, and played up the bilateral trade partnership. Ten days after the trip concluded, China’s central bank, the Bank of China, set up a $1 billion investment joint venture called Bohai Harvest RST. For the record, the “RS” referred to Biden’s son’s firm, Rosemont Seneca.
That’s questionable enough; But months later, in July 2014, the Secretary of State traveled to China, also for talks. He talked little of China’s clear aggression, but did conspicuously note that “China and the United States represent the greatest economic alliance trading partnership in the history of humankind.” He should know. In the ensuing months, Chinese government-linked firms took major stakes in several of the firms owned or controlled by their family, and provided them with massive funding totaling billions of dollars. Nor is this the only scandal involving these guys.
While we can provide hundreds of thousands of such examples, it is up to YOU, as a citizen, to call these public figures (who are your EMPLOYEES) to task when it occurs and remove them from office in special elections, mid-term.
We Have The Names And Addresses Of Over 500 People In Silicon Valley Paying Bribes To Universities, Senators and News Media Outlets
Mar 27, 2019The prominent SiliconValley investor charged in the college bribery scandal, Bill McGlashan, has a unique response to the indictment that has already stripped him of his high-powered private …
Mar 13, 2019The head of a SiliconValley hedge fund who became ensnared in a massive college bribery scandal is stepping down. Manuel Henriquez will be replaced as CEO and chairman of Hercules Capital in Palo …
Mar 15, 2019According to various report, SiliconValley investor Bill McGlashan has parted ways with TPG Capital. Although the firm claims that it fired McGlashan in response to the criminal charges against him in the college bribery scandal, McGlashan claims that he resigned.
Mar 13, 2019The Justice Department on Tuesday announced dozens of charges related to a massive college admissions bribery scheme, involving big names from Hollywood actresses to Wall Street and SiliconValley executives. Documents describe a scheme in which wealthy parents paid a company to help their children cheat on college entrance exams or bribe …
Illegal – Cash bribes, blackmail, collusion, etc. I have not seen this myself, thank goodness, but I’m sure it happens. Legal – Rewarding reciprocity and punishing those who you help but don't help you back.
Mar 2, 2017One thought on “Judge Socrates Manoukian, Judicial Corruption, Bribery, Fraud and Manslaughter” Pingback: Detective David Carroll Violent Stalker – SiliconValley Corruption. Santa Clara County, California, / San Francisco Bay Area.
Dec 3, 2018SiliconValley Corruption. Santa Clara County, California, / San Francisco Bay Area. Criminals in government abusing positions of power. SiliconValley Corruption. Santa Clara County, California, / San Francisco Bay Area. White Collar organized crime by government agencies and officials
Mar 13, 2019The head of a SiliconValley hedge fund who became ensnared in a massive college bribery scandal is stepping down. Manuel Henriquez will be replaced as CEO and chairman of Hercules Capital in Palo Alto. Henriquez was arrested in New York City and released on $500,000 bail after a brief appearance in Manhattan federal court Tuesday.
Jack Abramoff: The lobbyist’s playbook
Jack Abramoff, the notorious former lobbyist at the center of Washington’s biggest corruption scandal in decades, spent more than three years in prison for his crimes. Now a free man, he reveals how he was able to influence politicians and their staffers through generous gifts and job offers. He tells Lesley Stahl the reforms instituted in the wake of his scandal have had little effect.
The following is a script of “The Lobbyist’s Playbook” which aired on Nov. 6, 2011. Lesley Stahl is the correspondent. Ira Rosen, producer.
Jack Abramoff may be the most notorious and crooked lobbyist of our time. He was at the center of a massive scandal of brazen corruption and influence peddling.
60 Minutes Overtime
Jack Abramoff: Inside Capitol corruption »
As a Republican lobbyist starting in the mid 1990s, he became a master at showering gifts on lawmakers in return for their votes on legislation and tax breaks favorable to his clients. He was so good at it, he took home $20 million a year.
It all came crashing down five years ago, when Jack Abramoff pled guilty to corrupting public officials, tax evasion and fraud, and served three and a half years in prison.
Today he’s a symbol of how money corrupts Washington. In our interview tonight, he opens up his playbook for the first time.
And explains exactly how he used his clients’ money to buy powerful friends and influence legislation.
Jack Abramoff: I was so far into it that I couldn’t figure out where right and wrong was. I believed that I was among the top moral people in the business. I was totally blinded by what was going on.
Jack Abramoff was a whiz at influencing legislation and one way he did that was to get his clients, like some Indian tribes, to make substantial campaign contributions to select members of Congress.
Abramoff: As I look back it was effective. It certainly helped the people I was trying to help, both the clients and the Republicans at that time.
Lesley Stahl: But even that, you’re now saying, was corrupt?
Stahl: Can you quantify how much it costs to corrupt a congressman?
Abramoff: I was actually thinking of writing a book – “The Idiot’s Guide to Buying a Congressman” – as a way to put this all down. First, I think most congressmen don’t feel they’re being bought. Most congressmen, I think, can in their own mind justify the system.
Abramoff: –rationalize it and by the way we wanted as lobbyists for them to feel that way.
Abramoff would provide freebies and gifts – looking for favors for his clients in return. He’d lavish certain congressmen and senators with access to private jets and junkets to the world’s great golf destinations like St. Andrews in Scotland. Free meals at his own upscale Washington restaurant and access to the best tickets to all the area’s sporting events; including two skyboxes at Washington Redskins games.
Abramoff: I spent over a million dollars a year on tickets to sporting events and concerts and what not at all the venues.
Stahl: A million dollars?
Abramoff: Ya. Ya.
Stahl: For the best seats?
Abramoff: The best seats. I had two people on my staff whose virtual full-time job was booking tickets. We were Ticketmaster for these guys.
Stahl: And the congressman or senator could take his favorite people from his district to the game–
Abramoff: The congressman or senator uh, could take two dozen of his favorite people from their district.
Stahl: Was all that legal?
Abramoff: We would certainly try to make the activity legal, if we could. At times we didn’t care.
But the “best way” to get a congressional office to do his bidding – he says – was to offer a staffer a job that could triple his salary.
Abramoff: When we would become friendly with an office and they were important to us, and the chief of staff was a competent person, I would say or my staff would say to him or her at some point, “You know, when you’re done working on the Hill, we’d very much like you to consider coming to work for us.” Now the moment I said that to them or any of our staff said that to ’em, that was it. We owned them. And what does that mean? Every request from our office, every request of our clients, everything that we want, they’re gonna do. And not only that, they’re gonna think of things we can’t think of to do.
Neil Volz: Jack Abramoff could sweet talk a dog off a meat truck, that’s how persuasive he was.
Neil Volz was one of the staffers Abramoff was talking about. He was chief of staff to Congressman Bob Ney, who as chairman of the House Administration Committee had considerable power to dispense favors. Abramoff targeted Volz and offered him a job.
Stahl: You’re the chief of staff of a powerful congressman. And Jack owns you and you haven’t even left working for the congressman.
Volz: I have the distinct memory of, you know, negotiating with Jack at a hockey game. So we’re, you know, just a few rows back. The crowd’s goin’ crazy. And Jack and I are havin’ a business conversation. And, you know, I’m– I’m wrestlin’ with how much I think I should get paid. And then five minutes later we’re– he’s askin’ me questions about some clients of his.
Stahl: When you look back was that the corrupting moment?
Volz: I think we were guilty of engaging in a corrupt relationship. So there were several corrupting moments. There isn’t just one moment. There were many.
Abramoff: At the end of the day most of the people that I encountered who worked on Capitol Hill wanted to come work on K Street, wanted to be lobbyists.
Stahl: You’re telling me this, the genius of figuring out you could own the office by offering a job to the chief of staff, say. I’m having two reactions. One is brilliant. And the other is I’m sick to my stomach.
Abramoff: Right. Evil. Yeah. Terrible.
Stahl: ‘Cause it’s hurting our country.
Abramoff: Shameful. Absolutely. It’s the worst thing that could happen. All parts of the system.
Stahl: I’m mad at you.
Abramoff: I was mad at me–
Stahl: I’m not kidding. I’m not kidding.
Abramoff: Look I did things and I was involved in the system I should not have been in. I’m ashamed of the fact I was there, the very reason why now I’m speaking about it. And now I’m trying to do something, in recompense, is the fact that I thought it was– it was wrong of me to do it.
One of the offices he keyed on was that of his good friend, the Majority Leader Tom Delay, eventually hiring his deputy chief of staff and his press secretary, and going into business with Delay’s chief of staff.
Stahl: Did you own his staff?
Abramoff: I was as close to his staff as to any staff. I had a very strong personal relationship with a lot of his staff.
Stahl: How many congressional offices did you actually own?
Abramoff: We probably had very strong influence in 100 offices at the time.
Stahl: Come on.
Stahl: A hundred offices?
Abramoff: In those days, I would view that as a failure. Because that leaves 335 offices that we didn’t have strong influence in.
Stahl: Did he own you?
Bob Ney: Oh, I don’t believe Jack Abramoff owned me. But were we involved in the culture of corruption together? Absolutely.
Former Republican Congressman Bob Ney was ambitious and looked at Abramoff as a way to build alliances with the White House and the majority leader.
Ney: I wanted to be speaker of the House and Jack Abramoff was the beautiful light of day for me to get to the person who I had had some conflicts with, Tom Delay.
Abramoff began inviting Ney on golf trips including one to Scotland and to his restaurant Signatures, where Ney was given food and drinks on the house, a violation of the congressional gift limit laws. Ney says he was hardly the only one crossing the line.
Ney: But I will still tell you, at that point in time, in order to get a drink at Signatures you had to shove White House staffers of George Bush the heck away from the bar. And it was packed with people. And there were members. Now that doesn’t mean everybody did everything for Jack. But if you wanna talk about strict interpretation of violation of the– of– of the laws of drink and food, Katey bar the door, she was wide open, two shotguns blarin’.
After months of taking handouts, Ney was approached by Neil Volz, his former chief of staff, by then a lobbyist for Abramoff.
Volz: I let you down man and I’m sorry…
Volz asked Ney to insert some language into a reform bill that would give a backdoor license to an Indian casino owned by one of Abramoff’s clients. You often hear about lobbyists getting special secret deals for their clients like this. It’s an insidious technique that Abramoff perfected.
Abramoff: So what we did was we crafted language that was so obscure, so confusing, so uninformative, but so precise to change the U.S. code.
Stahl: Here’s what you tried to get tacked on to this reform bill.
Stahl: “Public law 100-89 is amended by striking section 207 (101 stat. 668, 672).”
Abramoff: Right. Now isn’t that obvious what that means? It was perfect. It was perfect.
Stahl: So that’s what you tried to get inserted?
Stahl: And that was gonna provide for a casino?
Stahl: And who on earth is gonna know that?
Abramoff: No one except the chairmen of the committees.
Stahl: Who stuck it in there?
Stahl: And that’s one of the things you used to do?
Stahl: And it was deliberately written like that?
Abramoff: Precisely. Yes.
Stahl: And that’s done a lot?
Abramoff: Members don’t read the bills.
Stahl: You didn’t even know what it was for?
Ney: Had no idea. And then when we got the written language–
Stahl: Well– why didn’t you know what it was for?
Ney: I didn’t– I didn’t care.
Ney: It was a great big shell game. And I was in the middle of it, whether, you know, knowing or not. I– I was dumb enough to not say, “What’s this thing do?”
Ney would eventually serve 17 months in federal prison, the only congressman who was ever charged in the scandal. But Abramoff says that there were many other members that did his bidding that could have been charged.
Stahl: Was buying favors from lawmakers easy?
Abramoff: I think people are under the impression that the corruption only involves somebody handing over a check and getting a favor. And that’s not the case. The corruption, the bribery, call it, because ultimately that’s what it is. That’s what the whole system is.
Stahl: The whole system’s bribery?
Abramoff: In my view. I’m talking about giving a gift to somebody who makes a decision on behalf of the public. At the end of the day, that’s really what bribery is. But it is done everyday and it is still being done. The truth is there were very few members who I could even name or could think of who didn’t at some level participate in that.
Abramoff prided himself on being a man who did good. He was devoutly religious and exorbitantly charitable and he says he gave away 80 percent of his earnings. When he fell from grace, his reputation was in tatters because it was not just that he had corrupted Congress – it was found he had cheated his clients, like the Indian tribes.
Abramoff: Most of the money I made I gave away, to either communal or charitable causes. So I thought frankly I was one of the most moral lobbyists out there.
Things began to unravel for Abramoff when the Washington Post published a largely unflattering portrait of him in 2004, reporting that he charged his clients 10 times more than any other lobbyist in town.
Abramoff: My first response was, “What’s the big deal? I don’t understand what this is about. This is what lobbyists do.
What he didn’t understand was the part that said he and a former aide to Tom Delay had overbilled four of his Indian casino clients by $45 million.
In the end, he was brought up on federal charges of tax evasion and ripping off Indian tribes. On the day he went to court and pled guilty, Abramoff looked grim. The judge sentenced him to four years.
Stahl: I really think what you were doing was– was subverting the essence of our system.
Abramoff: Yes. Absolutely right. But our system is flawed and has to be fixed. Human beings populate our system. Human beings are weak.
Stahl: And you preyed on that?
Abramoff: I did. I was one of many who did. I did. And I’m ashamed of that fact.
He was sent to a medium security facility in Cumberland, Maryland. When he was released last June, he began working as an accountant at a kosher pizza parlor. Turns out Jack Abramoff was broke, partly because he is paying off nearly $24 million in restitution to the Indian tribes. Today he lives in his old house in Maryland with his wife, five children and the two doberman pinschers Mrs. Abramoff bought to protect the family while he was away.
After the scandal, Congress instituted a package of reforms, making what Abramoff did – like plying members of Congress with free expensive meals – illegal. But he doesn’t see the new reforms as being very effective.
Abramoff: The reform efforts continually are these faux-reform efforts where they’ll change, they’ll tweak the system. They’ll say, “You can have a meal with a congressman if they’re standing up, not sitting down.”
Stahl: Is that serious? Or are you joking?
Abramoff: Oh no, I’m not joking at all.
Stahl: So, it’s okay if you pay for lunch as long as you stand up?
Abramoff: Well, it’s actually worse than that. You can’t take a congressman to lunch for $25 and buy him a hamburger or a steak of something like that. But you can take him to a fundraising lunch and not only buy him that steak, but give him $25,000 extra and call it a fundraiser. And have all the same access and all the same interaction with that congressman. So the people who make the reforms are the people in the system.
Stahl: Could you do the same thing today? I’m asking you whether you think the system’s been cleaned up?
Abramoff: Could do the same thing that I? Yeah. No, the system hasn’t been cleaned up at all.
Stahl: At all.
Abramoff: There’s an arrogance on the part of lobbyists, and certainly there was on the part of me and my team, that no matter what they come up we, we’re smarter than they are and we’ll overcome it. We’ll just find another way through. That’s all.
He says the most important thing that needs to be done is to prohibit members of Congress and their staff from ever becoming lobbyists in Washington.
Abramoff: If you make the choice to serve the public, public service, then serve the public, not yourself. When you’re done, go home. Washington’s a dangerous place. Don’t hang around.
Former Congressman Bob Ney now works part-time as a radio host.
His former chief of staff Neil Volz is currently working as a night janitor at a Florida restaurant.
And Jack Abramoff has written a memoir called “Capitol Punishment.”