Turns out that even though the "Putin" money is fake from a fake story, it still spends better than Harvey Weinstein's money. ;)
Printable View
You are so misguided. The true "systemic racism" in this story is how Black Americans VOTE. For the most part, they've been voting for crooked, anti-business, liberal Democrats since 1965 (the same year the Civil Rights bill was passed on LBJ's watch), and it has failed them. When the leaders in your community are named Marion Berry, Jesse Jackson Jr, Ray Nagin, Charles Rangel, Kwame Kilpatrick, etc... you're just asking for trouble that you really can't afford. And it doesn't help when the names are "white guys" and liberal Democrats either. We've seen entire cities like Baltimore, Detroit, Chicago, Newark, and others run into the ground after continuously electing liberal Democrats for the last 50 years.
During last year's Baltimore riots for example, I read that the City of Baltimore hasn't elected a Republican Mayor since the 1960's. Since that time, Baltimore lost over 100,000 manufacturing jobs, or 75% of its industrial employment. The collapse of industry led to a number of changes in the demographic makeup of the City and the surrounding region, contributing to a crisis in urban poverty that lingers today. With liberal Democrats at the helm, factories bled manufacturing jobs, and Baltimore bled residents. Baltimore watched nearly one-third of its population leave. Good businesses fled the city, followed by workers. Ultimately, Baltimore's population shrank from 950,000 in 1960 to 657,000 by 1997. Today, Baltimore's population is at a 100-yr low, with 614,664 residents. That's down 1% in 2016. Is it any wonder they are rioting in Baltimore?
Meanwhile, Baltimore’s suburbs grew from 387,656 residents in 1950 to over 1.8 million in 1997.
To your point above regarding the author, the only way to really lift mass numbers of people out of poverty, is through jobs. Business. And Baltimore is a great example of what happens when a city doesn't take care of its' business community. And Baltimore is only one of many examples.
So, what has this heavy, systemic, liberal Democratic voting pattern earned the African American community? Bankrupt cities, higher crime rates, smaller populations, fewer jobs, lower incomes, increased welfare, terrible educations, higher birth rates to unwed mothers and poor neighborhoods. You would think with a record like that, the African American community would try something new and different at the voting booth. (Even on Obama's watch, the income's for Black American's went down!) And with a murder rate as high as Chicago's, you would think they would try anything different than voting for another liberal Democrat.
And Putin's money went into the Clinton Foundation for the uranium she dealt him.
Clinton Russia Ties: Bill & Hillary Sold Out U.S. Interests to Putin ...
www.nationalreview.com/.../clinton-russia-ties-bill-hillary-sold-out-us-interests-putin-...
Apr 7, 2017 - How the Clintons Sold Out U.S. National Interests to the Putin Regime .... The shadiest deal that the Clintons hatched with Russia is called Uranium One. This outrage should mushroom intoHillary and Bill's radioactive .... or pledged funds to the Clinton Foundation or paid speaking fees to Bill Clinton.
Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal - The ...
https://www.nytimes.com/.../cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-c...
Apr 23, 2015 - The deal was strategically important to Mr. Putin, who shortly after the ... Donations to the Clinton Foundation, and a Russian Uranium ..... And in this case , there were broader geopolitical pressures that likely came into play as ...
Oops: The New York Times Accidentally Exposed 'The Hillary Clinton ...
www.investors.com/.../check-it-out-the-new-york-times-just-exposed-the-hillary-clint...
May 12, 2017 - The Clinton Foundation took money from Russian officials and oligarchs, including Victor Kekselberg, a Putin confidant. ... government in 2010, giving Russia control of 20% of the uraniumdeposits in the U.S. — the sale ... The report goes on to note that "Podesta's efforts were a key part of under-the-radar ...
No One Mentions That The Russian Trail Leads To Democratic - Forbes
https://www.forbes.com/.../no-one-mentions-that-the-russian-trail-leads-to-democratic...
Feb 18, 2017 - “Sberbank is the Kremlin, they don't do anything major without Putin's go-ahead, and ... Russian Billionaires, Including Some Tied To Putin, Have Gained $29 Billion. ... That's not all: The busy Podesta Group also represented Uranium One ... Notably, Frank Giustra, the Clinton Foundation'slargest and most ..
There's not much private about the NFL business. The NFL is a legal monopoly that's been the beneficiary of a favorable tax status from the Feds for many decades. Only very recently has the NFL made the decision that they no longer need the favorable tax status. Of course, the NFL still receives enormous amounts of money from the public coffers in the form of stadium partnerships, practice field and headquarters incentives, etc....
Snopes has died a slow death a while back my man. Their fake news and bloggish BS liberal spin in their post caught up with them.
Is Snopes.com, the original Internet fact-checker, going out of business ...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/...snopescom...going-out-of-business/.../8a03d196-708...
Jul 25, 2017 - It's worth checking: The site says it faces bankruptcy in a legal battle, but the other side disputes that.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevle.../#2299cd26227f
Quote:
Put another way, some Republicans believe firmly that climate change is a falsehood and that humans are not responsible in any way for climatic change. Those in the scientific community might object to an anti-climate change Republican serving as a fact checker for climate change stories at Snopes and flagging every article about a new scientific study on climate change as fake news. Yet, we have no way of knowing the biases of the fact checkers at Snopes – we simply have to trust that the site’s views on what constitutes neutrality are the same as ours.
When I asked for comment on the specific detailed criteria Snopes uses to screen its applicants and decide who to hire as a fact checker, surprisingly David demurred, saying only that the site looks for applicants across all fields and skills. He specifically did not provide any detail of any kind regarding the screening process and how Snopes evaluates potential hires. David also did not respond to further emails asking whether, as part of the screening process, Snopes has applicants fact check a set of articles to evaluate their reasoning and research skills and to gain insight into their thinking process.
This was highly unexpected, as I had assumed that a fact checking site as reputable as Snopes would have a detailed written formal evaluation process for new fact checkers that would include having them perform a set of fact checks and include a lengthy set of interview questions designed to assess their ability to identify potential or perceived conflicts of interest and work through potential biases.
Well, since you brought WaPo into this, they gave this Clinton Uranium story 4 Pinocchios.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.8781f86224f2
So they validated Snopes on this particular issue.
One lying libtard source echoes another lying libtard source and you see that as validation!? :laugh:
Are you serious? If obama had blasted in the NFL owners for not doing what was correct, I would have cheered that he had finally done something correct while in office. There was no chance of that happening though- he was too busy trying to destroy America and encourage people to hate it. That's hilarious that you could even think it could have happened.