SIGNED INTO LAW: Wisconsin Formally Ends Sales Taxes on Gold and Silver

Money Metals News Service
-
0
SIGNED INTO LAW: Wisconsin Formally Ends Sales Taxes on Gold and Silver

(Jp Cortez, Sound Money Defense League, Money Metals News Service) Responding to an overwhelming groundswell of grassroots pressure, Gov. Tony Evers today signed a bill into law that secures Wisconsin’s place as the 44th state in America to end sales taxes on the purchase of precious metals.

Wisconsin Flag

Assembly Bill 29 and Senate Bill 33, carried by Rep. Sortwell and Sen. Stroebel, respectively, enjoyed strong bipartisan support in both chambers of the Wisconsin legislature before it landed on Gov. Evers’ desk.

Backed by the Sound Money Defense League, Money Metals Exchange, and in-state Wisconsin dealers and investors, the legislative effort built upon last year’s educational campaign.

In 2023, similar bills had been introduced in Madison but failed to receive a hearing.

The new statewide sales tax exemption on bullion coins, bars, or rounds (minted of gold or silver, but also platinum, palladium, or copper) takes formal effect on Saturday, March 23rd.

“As inflation ravages American families, Wisconsin has taken an important step toward remonetizing gold and silver, a proven inflation hedge and the only form of money mentioned in the U.S. Constitution,” said Jp Cortez, executive director of the Sound Money Defense League.

Every one of Wisconsin’s neighbors (Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, Michigan) had already stopped taxing the monetary metals – a situation that placed additional pressure on the Badger State.

Precious Metals Sales Tax

Meanwhile, other states have been repealing this sales tax in recent years: Mississippi in 2023, Tennessee in 2022, and Arkansas and Ohio in 2021.

Other states may yet pass similar exemptions this year.

In response to Gov. Evers signing the bill into law today, Sen. Stroebel said, “I am proud to have played a leading role in the effort to finally add Wisconsin to the long list of [tax-exempt] states. Unlike other common financial instruments, gold and silver are explicitly identified as money in the U.S. Constitution.”

He continued, “The signing of AB 29 removes a key barrier for Wisconsinites seeking to build and protect their wealth and puts gold and silver on an equal footing with other types of investment vehicles.”

Until now, Wisconsin citizens have been discouraged from protecting their savings against the devaluation of the dollar because they were penalized with sales taxation for doing so.

Eliminating sales taxes on the monetary metals is good public policy for many reasons:

  • Levying sales taxes on precious metals is inappropriate. Sales taxes are typically levied on final consumer goods. Computers, shirts, and shoes carry sales taxes because the consumer is “consuming” the good. Precious metals are inherently held for resale, not “consumption,” making the application of sales taxes on precious metals inappropriate. 
  • Studies have shown that taxing precious metals is an inefficient form of revenue collection. The results of one study involving Michigan show that any sales tax proceeds a state collects on precious metals are likely surpassed by the state revenue lost from conventions, businesses, and economic activity that are driven out of the state. 
  • Taxing gold and silver harms in-state businesses. It’s a competitive marketplace, so buyers will take their business to neighboring states, thereby undermining in-state jobs. Investors can easily avoid paying $120 in sales taxes, for example, on a $2,200 purchase of a one-ounce gold bar. 
  • Taxing precious metals is unfair to certain savers and investors. Gold and silver are held as forms of savings and investment. Wisconsin already does not tax the purchase of stocks, bonds, ETFs, currencies, and other financial instruments. 
  • Taxing precious metals is harmful to citizens attempting to protect their assets. Purchasers of precious metals aren’t fat-cat investors. Most who buy precious metals do so in small increments as a way of saving money. Precious metals investors are purchasing precious metals as a way to preserve their wealth against the damages of inflation. Inflation harms the poorest among us, including pensioners, Wisconsinites on fixed incomes, wage earners, savers, and more.

“With the signing of AB 29, only six states in the entire country still levy this ridiculous tax on precious metals,” said Stefan Gleason, president of Money Metals and Chairman of the Sound Money Defense League.

He continued, “We will continue fighting for our precious metals customers in every state that still fully taxes gold and silver purchases, specifically New Jersey, Maine, Kentucky, Vermont, Hawaii, and New Mexico.”

Similar bills are moving forward rapidly right now in Kentucky and New Jersey. Within a few weeks, it’s possible Kentucky and New Jersey could become the 45th and 46th states to enact this particular reform.

More than a dozen other states have introduced pro-sound money legislation in 2024 so far, including Alaska, Indiana, Iowa, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Idaho, Arizona, Utah, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Kansas, Vermont, and West Virginia.

Wisconsin was tied for 45th out of 50 in the 2024 Sound Money Index. Enactment of this measure is expected to boost the state’s ranking dramatically.

Oh-Tay: Houston Cops Nab ‘Little Rascals’ Bank-Robber Gang, Ages 11-16, after Heist

Editor 1
-
0
Oh-Tay: Houston Cops Nab ‘Little Rascals’ Bank-Robber Gang, Ages 11-16, after Heist

(Headline USA) Three boys, ages 11, 12 and 16, and dubbed the “Little Rascals,” have been arrested for robbing a bank in Houston, authorities confirmed Wednesday.

Harris County Sheriff Ed Gonzalez said the youngsters are in custody and have been charged with robbery by threat.

Gonzalez said that because of their ages, no additional information would be released, and the sheriff’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request for more information.

The FBI’s Houston office says they were wanted for robbing a Wells Fargo bank in the Greenspoint area of north Houston on March 14.

The FBI tweeted security camera images of the trio, showing all three of them wearing hoodies inside the bank’s lobby.

A message left with the FBI seeking additional information wasn’t immediately returned.

Houston’s ABC 13 reported that the boys passed a threatening note to a teller before fleeing on foot with an undisclosed amount of cash.

The station also reported that the parents of two of the boys identified them after their photos were released, while a third boy was recognized by a law enforcement officer following a fight.

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

‘Something Stinks to High Hell’: ATF Shoots Clinton Airport Exec in Head During Raid

Editor 1
-
0
‘Something Stinks to High Hell’: ATF Shoots Clinton Airport Exec in Head During Raid

(Headline USA) The brother of a Little Rock airport executive shot by federal agents serving a search warrant said he fears the victims may not survive and was left wanting answers about the mysterious pre-dawn raid that appeared to have gone awry.

Bryan Malinowski, 53, was injured in a shootout Tuesday with agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives at his west Little Rock home.

Malinowski’s older brother, Matthew, told NBC News that the family was not sure if the victim was “going to make it in the next 24 hours” while confirming his brother was shot in the head during the exchange of gunfire.

He said doctors are keeping his brother on life support and not performing surgery because they don’t think he would survive. “We don’t know how much longer he has to live.”

The raid on Malinowski, the executive director of the Bill and Hillary Clinton National Airport, adds to an enigma that already raises the red flags of some conspiracy theorists if only for its connection to the notorious power couple through the airport’s name.

It was unclear if a fiery crash of a single-engine aircraft at the airport, which killed the pilot, could be connected.

Neither the ATF, state police nor federal prosecutors would provide details of what agents were looking for, citing an ongoing investigation.

ATF officials said agents were serving a search warrant at Bryan Malinowski’s home just after 6 a.m. The agents said he fired at them from inside the home, at which point they returned fire. One ATF agent suffered a non-life-threatening injury and was hospitalized.

Around 2:35 p.m., Little Rock firefighters carrying a power saw and a Halligan tool—a large prybar—were seen walking toward the house.

An ATF agent was overheard saying they were at the scene to help agents open a safe in Malinowski’s house, the Arkansas Democrat–Gazette reported.

Matthew Malinowski questioned why agents came to his brother’s home so early instead of approaching him at work. He contends the agents “broke down his door” leaving his brother no choice but to “defend himself.”

“There’s something fishy here. The ATF went after him in the worst possible way,” he said. “There’s no reason why they couldn’t have arrested him at work at the airport.”

Matthew Malinowski also said it seemed odd that his brother could be entangled with the law, noting that he was well connected in Arkansas, had an annual salary of more than $250,000, lived in a nice suburb and had collections of guns and coins.

“When someone makes that much money, there’s no incentive to do anything wrong,” the brother said. “He has so much to lose.”

But such has been the case for many who find themselves snared in the web of criminal intrigue surrounding the Clintons, whose ever-growing body count has become a cultural phenomenon unto itself with high-profile names like Vince Foster, Seth Rich and Jeffrey Epstein among the dozens who died under extraordinarily mysterious circumstances.

The Clintons also have been accused of participating in criminal rings including drug-running and child-trafficking through the decades, although no charges have yet to stick.

With the Malinowski family still wondering what sparked the shooting and federal investigators still not releasing any details, Matthew Malinowski said the case against his brother doesn’t add up.

“Something stinks to high hell,” he said.

According to his biography on the airport’s website, Bryan Malinowski has worked in the airline industry for more than 30 years, serving in operational leadership roles at Fort Lauderdale–Hollywood International Airport, El Paso International Airport in Texas and Lehigh Valley International Airport in Pennsylvania.

Malinowski joined the management team at Clinton National in 2008 as director of properties, planning and development before being promoted to deputy director of the airport a year later. He took over as executive director in 2019.

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

DOJ Threatens to Increase Sentences for J6 Defendants if SCOTUS Overturns Dubious Charge

Ken Silva
-
0
DOJ Threatens to Increase Sentences for J6 Defendants if SCOTUS Overturns Dubious Charge

(Ken Silva, Headline USA) The Supreme Court is set to hear a challenge to the “Obstruction of an Official Proceeding” charge that hundreds of Jan. 6 protestors have been slapped with.

If the challenge is successful, hundreds of defendants could be eligible for a sentence reduction. However, the Justice Department has threatened that it will seek stiffer sentences for other crimes if it can no longer utilize the obstruction charge.

The DOJ’s threat was made in a motion this week in the case of Anthony Williams, a Jan. 6 protestor who was found guilty of obstruction along with four misdemeanors. Williams is serving a 60-month prison sentence for those charges, and he’s seeking his release.

Opposing Williams’s bid to get out of jail, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Matthew Graves signaled what he’ll do if SCOTUS overturns the obstruction charge against Williams and hundreds of other J6ers.

“Williams nevertheless cannot show that there is any likelihood that the outcome in Fischer will result in a reduced sentence … because the government’s sentencing recommendation likely would be different in the absence of a conviction for obstruction of an official proceeding … and could include a request for consecutive sentences to account for both the severity of Williams’s conduct on January 6 and for the aspects of his conduct and history that the Court originally found warranted a sixty (60) month sentence,” Graves said.

Reporter Julie Kelly, who first reported on Graves’s motion, read between the lines of what the politically motivated prosecutor was saying.

“In other words—don’t you dare,” Kelly said. “Not only is Graves’ approach a punitive admonition to J6ers planning to seek relief, but it’s also a thumb in the nose of the Supreme Court. Go ahead and reverse us, Graves is saying in so many words, we will find another way to punish these individuals.”

The obstruction charge that SCOTUS will review was originally intended to punish people who destroy evidence or intimidate witnesses. Indeed, the statute in question was passed by Congress in wake of the Enron scandal, to punish business executives for altering financial documents.

But in the wake of J6, the Justice Department is using the statute to target protestors who interrupted the proceedings on Capitol Hill.

SCOTUS is scheduled to hear the challenge to the obstruction statute on April 16.

Ken Silva is a staff writer at Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/jd_cashless.

MAHARREY: The Federal Reserve Didn’t Do Anything But It Had Plenty to Say

Money Metals News Service
-
0
MAHARREY: The Federal Reserve Didn’t Do Anything But It Had Plenty to Say

(Mike Maharrey, Money Metals News Service) The Federal Reserve didn’t do anything at its March Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting, but Jerome Powell & Company had plenty to say.

The Fed’s dovish rhetoric sent a wave of relief through the markets and drove stocks to yet another all-time high.

People would probably be wise to remember that saying isn’t doing.

What the Federal Reserve Did

The FOMC held interest rates steady, set between 5.25 and 5.5 percent. Rates have been at this level since last July.

The official FOMC statement was substantively the same as the statement issued after the January meeting, featuring the typical mishmash of Fed-speak.

“In support of its goals, the Committee decided to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 5-1/4 to 5-1/2 percent. In considering any adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate, the Committee will carefully assess incoming data, the evolving outlook, and the balance of risks. The Committee does not expect it will be appropriate to reduce the target range until it has gained greater confidence that inflation is moving sustainably toward 2 percent.”

Make of that what you will. 

The only change to the statement was in its overview of job gains. In January, the FOMC reported, “Job gains have moderated since early last year but remained strong.” The March statement removed the phrase, “have moderated since early last year.”

So, from a substantive standpoint, the FOMC meeting was a big yawner. 

What the Fed People Said

The March meeting was all about “open-mouth operations.” Since the central bank didn’t do anything, everybody focused on what Jerome Powell and the committee members said.

And they said plenty.

The highlight of the meeting was the release of an updated “dot plot” projecting the trajectory of interest rate policy.

Despite sticky price inflation, the FOMC indicated that it still plans to cut interest rates three times in 2024. If it moves in 25-basis point increments as expected, that would lower rates to between 4.5 and 4.75 percent by the end of the year.

The committee projects additional cuts in 2025, dropping rates to around 3 percent.

Digging into the details, 10 of the 19 FOMC members projected three cuts this year. That was down from 11 in the December dot plot. On the other hand, every committee member now anticipates at least one cut this year. In December, two members projected no cuts.

During his post-meeting press conference, Powell also indicated that the Fed is considering slowing the pace of balance sheet reduction.

“The general sense of the committee is that it will be appropriate to slow the pace of run-off fairly soon, consistent with the plans we’ve previously issued.”

The Fed balance sheet has decreased by about $1.42 trillion since it began quantitative tightening. That sounds impressive until you remember that the Fed added nearly $5 trillion during the pandemic. That was on top of the massive blowup of the balance sheet during the Great Recession that the Fed was never able to run off as promised.

Balance sheet reduction is one of the indicators that the Fed was never fully committed to an inflation fight.

In fact, based on the balance sheet reduction plan announced by the Fed when it began its inflation fight, it would take about seven years just to return the balance sheet to its pre-pandemic level.

That’s an awful lot of inflation still bubbling around in the economy. (Keep in mind that inflation is an increase in the money supply. Rising prices are a symptom of monetary inflation.)

One might wonder how the FOMC can still anticipate three rate cuts and a slowing of balance sheet reduction in 2024 given the hotter-than-expected price inflation data so far this year.

According to Powell, hotter data doesn’t necessarily mean inflation isn’t in retreat.

“I think they haven’t really changed the overall story, which is that of inflation moving down gradually on a sometimes bumpy road toward 2%. We’re not going to overreact to these two months of data, nor are we going to ignore them.”

It really comes down to how you’re inclined to spin the data.

The FOMC also released projections on the trajectory of the economy. The Fed now expects even stronger economic growth this year, with GDP rising by 2.1 percent on an annualized basis. That was up from a 1.4 percent estimate in December.

Powell & Company also expects job growth to continue strong.

Notably, a growing economy and a strong labor market were reasons to hold rates higher for longer just a few months ago. On Wednesday, Powell tried to back away from that notion.

“Strong hiring in and of itself would not be a reason to hold off on rate cuts.”

He also insisted that the job market by itself was not cause for concern around inflation.

Easy Money Is One Heck of a Drug

Powell & Company said exactly what the markets wanted to hear.

They are desperate for rate cuts and an easing of monetary policy. While nobody wants to say it out loud, most people realize this economy isn’t built to operate in even a moderately high interest rate environment. There is too much debt in the system. Most people understand that the longer rates remain higher, the more likely it becomes that something in the economy will break.

The promise of rate cuts sent the markets soaring.

You can see from this chart just how strongly the S&P 500 reacted to the Fed’s messaging.

The S&P rose 0.8 percent on the day and closed above 5,200 for the first time.

The Dow Jones also soared, gaining 400 points and setting a new record on Wednesday.

Meanwhile, the NASDAQ jumped by more than 1 percent and also closed at a new record.

Gold charted a new record high as well, with the mainstream anticipating a lower interest rate environment moving forward.

The irony is the mainstream is excited because it anticipated victory over inflation and a return to easy money. But in the long run, more easy money means more inflation. It isn’t actually a victory – it’s a surrender.

The Fed Doesn’t Have a Very Good Track Record Projecting Interest Rates

Given that the Fed hasn’t done anything yet, all of the excitement in the mainstream might be a bit premature.

The fact of the matter is the Fed doesn’t do a very good job of predicting the trajectory of its own interest rate policy.

How bad is its track record?

Fund manager David Hay analyzed past dot plots and found the FOMC only got interest rate projections right 37 percent of the time. And as Hay pointed out, “They control interest rates!”

For instance, in March 2021, the FOMC projected the interest rate would still be zero in 2022. The actual 2022 rate was 1.75 percent. And in 2023, the vast majority of FOMC members thought the rate would still be at zero. The actual rate was over 5 percent.

The FOMC would probably get better results throwing darts at a chart.

My point is we don’t have a good reason to believe anything Powell & Company said or to think their musings tell us anything about the central bank’s next moves.

But make no mistake; the markets will get their easy money drug.

Here’s the reality: rate cuts (and more inflation) are screaming down the tracks. It’s just a matter of time. When something breaks in the economy – and something will break in this debt-riddled economy with interest rates at 5.5 percent (or even at 4.5 percent if the Fed delivers on its cuts – the Fed will be forced to cut (more). We’re talking about interest rates going back to zero and more quantitative easing.

That’s what the Fed does during an economic crisis.

It’s not so much that the Fed is in danger of breaking the economy with higher interest rates today. The Fed broke the economy more than a decade ago when it pushed rates artificially low and left them there for years. This incentivized debt and malinvestments. It’s only a matter of time before the house of cards falls down.

The Fed is stuck between a rock and a hard place. It knows that higher rates will eventually cause the economy to collapse. It also knows that inflation hasn’t been beat. So, it faces a choice: higher inflation or an economic crisis.

Or perhaps both.

This is why I think Powell is suddenly signaling rate cuts despite virtually all of the data screaming “Hold rates higher for longer!” or even, “Raise rates more!”

Financial analyst Jim Grant came up with the perfect analogy in an interview earlier this year. He said Powell and other Fed officials seem to look in the mirror and see themselves as Captain Chesley Burnett “Sully” Sullenberger who managed to land a crippled U.S. Airways jet on the Hudson River.

“The Fed has arrogated to itself the role of central planning agency. … It’s going to try to balance economic growth with the stability and integrity of the currency. How do they do that? I don’t think it’s given to mortal man and woman to do these things.”

Mike Maharrey is a journalist and market analyst for MoneyMetals.com with over a decade of experience in precious metals. He holds a BS in accounting from the University of Kentucky and a BA in journalism from the University of South Florida.

Ghislaine Maxwell Moved to ‘Honor Dorm’ in Low-Security Prison

Ken Silva
-
0
Ghislaine Maxwell Moved to ‘Honor Dorm’ in Low-Security Prison

(Ken Silva, Headline USA) Convicted sex trafficker and Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell has been moved to the “honor dorm” of a low-security prison in Tallahassee, according to a report in the Daily Mail.

“Maxwell’s cushy new digs in D South – the so-called ‘honor dorm’ – are reserved for 30 to 40 of the low-security Florida lockup’s best-behaved prisoners,” the Daily Mail reported Monday.

“There are two bunks per cell but so few occupants that the disgraced British socialite, 62, is almost guaranteed to have her own room as well as four times the storage.”

The Daily Mail spoke with an anonymous source who described Maxwell’s new home.

“The conditions in D South are more like the sort of thing Maxwell will have experienced when she attended boarding school as a young girl,” a “prison source” said.

“Everything is well-ordered, there’s less problems, less drama, fights are unheard of. Everyone gets along because they are so happy to be there.”

Investigative reporter Nick Bryant noted that the honor dorm is typically reserved for prisoners who are just about to be released.

Maxwell’s move comes on the heels of a report about the squalid conditions of Maxwell’s prison.

Citing a report from Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General, the Independent reported last month that “black filth smeared on walls, rodent infestations, and sanitary products being used to plug leaks in dilapidated living quarters are a few of the issues recorded” at Tallahassee FCI.

“The report highlighted the prison’s food service and storage facilities, with vegetables found rotting in fridges and mouldy bread served to inmates. The cafeteria was found to contain broken stools with sharp edges which could be used as weapons, leaking windows, and scores of dead insects,” the Independent reported.

“Food warehouses were found to contain ‘seriously unsanitary conditions,’ including evidence of droppings by rodents who had chewed through boxes of food, bags of cereal infested with insects, and rusted and warped food containers.”

Meanwhile, Maxwell has an appeal pending in her case, as her lawyers contest her conviction on five charges of recruiting and grooming four underage girls for Epstein to abuse between 1994 and 2004.

Maxwell’s lawyers reportedly told New York’s Second Circuit appeals court this week that she should not have been prosecuted for grooming Epstein’s victims because of a provision in his 2008 sweetheart plea deal, according to the Daily Mail.

Ken Silva is a staff writer at Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/jd_cashless.

Mexico Won’t Take Back Deported Individuals from Texas

Luis Cornelio
-
0
Mexico Won’t Take Back Deported Individuals from Texas

(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) The Mexican government has formally announced that it will not accept any illegal immigrants removed from the U.S. by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott—joining a growing list of foreign countries refusing to accept their nationals. 

In a press statement published on Tuesday, the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs criticized the new Texas law authorizing local law enforcement to arrest illegal immigrants. 

The Mexican government inexplicably accused the Texas law of “criminalizing” the unauthorized “flow of migrants,” which in itself constitutes an actual violation of federal law.

“In this regard, Mexico will not accept, under any circumstances, repatriations by the State of Texas,” the Mexican government claimed, arguing that it is ensuring that it is now affected by state or local legislative decisions. 

More significantly, the Mexican government pledged to file a “friend-of-the-court” brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to support the Biden administration’s litigation against the law. 

Mexico’s announcement came after the U.S. Supreme Court allowed a historic Texas law authorizing state authorities to apprehend individuals suspected of being in the U.S. illegally. 

Mexico claimed that it has previously submitted filings against immigration laws, including Arizona SB1070 in 2010, Alabama HB56 in 2011, and Texas SB4 in 2017. 

“Mexico reiterates its legitimate right to protect the rights of its nationals in the United States and to determine its own policies regarding entry into its territory,” the statement read.

Abbott signed the law on December 18, 2023, thereby making illegal immigration a state crime. The law came into effect earlier this month. Subsequently, the Biden administration filed a lawsuit against Texas, asserting that the Constitution grants the power of immigration to the federal government—not states. 

The case is ongoing, and the Supreme Court has thus far refused to intervene to block the law until it the battle reaches its docket.

Venezuela, China and Cuba are some of the countries refusing to take back their citizens facing deportation from federal authorities.

Rico Suave? A Confused AOC Claims ‘RICO’ Not a Crime—Faces Immediate Mockery

Luis Cornelio
-
0
Rico Suave? A Confused AOC Claims ‘RICO’ Not a Crime—Faces Immediate Mockery

(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s attempt to corner Tony Bobulinski during a congressional hearing fell flat, sparking widespread mockery on social media. 

Bobulinski, a former business associate of Hunter Biden and a key witness in the impeachment inquiry of President Joe Biden, testified before the House Oversight Committee during a high-profile hearing. 

During the hearing, Cortez sought to grill Bobulinski on whether Joe Biden had committed any crimes in the shady business dealings of his son.

In response, Bobulinski alleged that the president may have violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and other corruption statutes.

Despite Bobulinski’s clarifications, Ocasio-Cortez persisted, questioning the nature of the crimes. Bobulinski, visibly confused, retorted, “RICO—you’re obviously not familar with—corruption statutes.” 

In a seemingly frustrated tone, Ocasio-Cortez interjected, stating that RICO does constitute a crime. “Excuse me sir. Excuse me sir. Excuse me sir, RICO is not a crime—it is a cat-e-gory. What is the crime?” she questioned.

Bobulinski swiftly clarified, “It’s a category of crimes that you’re then charged.” 

Unsatisfied with Bobulinski’s response, Ocasio-Cortez pressed further, saying, “You have charges—you have charges, please name.” 

Bobulinski complied, interjecting, “the exact statute under RICO?” to which the congresswoman replied, “Yes!” 

The exchange quickly gained momentum on social media, with many mocking Ocasio-Cortez’s apparent misunderstanding of what a RICO charge entails. Tellingly, RICO is indeed a crime, with former President Donald Trump currently facing RICO charges in Fulton County, Georgia. 

Ocasio-Cortez’s lack of knowledge about RICO sparked a wave of ridicule on social media, with the satirical news site, the Babylon Bee, humorously chiming in: “AOC Says RICO Not a Crime, He’s the Guy Who Delivers Her Food.”

Additionally, “Rico” in Spanish also means delicious or yummy, adding a layer of irony to the situation. 

Some critics pointed out a 1990s hit called Rico Suave by Hispanic rapper Gerardo, further highlighting the cultural and humorous references.

Headline USA has reached out to Ocasio-Cortez’s press office for clarification on what she meant when she described RICO as “not a crime” but as a “cat-e-gory.”

He’s Back: Obama’s Shocking Decision as Polls Reveal Biden Trailing Trump

Luis Cornelio
-
0
He’s Back: Obama’s Shocking Decision as Polls Reveal Biden Trailing Trump

(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) President Joe Biden has deployed a not-so-secret weapon in an apparent desperate bid to salvage his re-election campaign: summoning former President Barack Obama. 

Obama, along with former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is expected to campaign for the scandal-ridden president as he contends with both scathingly low polls and the forceful comeback of former President Donald Trump.

As reported by Politico on Tuesday, Obama and Pelosi will campaign on the 14th anniversary of the Affordable Care Act, notoriously known as Obamacare. 

Also coinciding with Obama and Pelosi’s reappearances is a new batch of ads in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, New Hampshire, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin – all of which Biden needs to win in 2024 but currently lacks popularity, trailing behind Trump in some state polls. 

On Saturday, the trio – Biden, Pelosi, and Obama – will hold a national call to rally the president’s supporters “around protecting the ACA from Trump’s attack. 

“The Affordable Care Act is so significant for both of them,” Biden campaign char Jen O’Malley Dillon claimed, referring to Biden and Obama. “It really shows what it means to have leaders fighting for you and doing things people thought were impossible.” 

In contrast, Trump has pledged to repeal the act, advocating instead for a newer system. 

“We’re gonna fight for much better health care than Obamacare,” Trump said earlier this year. “Obamacare is a catastrophe. Nobody talks about it. You know, without John McCain, we would have had it done.”

Obamacare was almost repealed until the late Sen. John McCain from Arizona voted with the Democrats to keep it.

The Heritage Foundation warned earlier this month that while insurer choice and competition in Obamacare is back to 2015 levels, insurance exchanges are still 24 percent less competitive than markets were before the enactment of Obamacare.

The new Biden campaign plan comes after Biden resurrected Obamacare during his State of the Union address, which was marred by gaffes, incoherencies, loud boos from Republicans and even a viral heckling from a grieving Gold Star father, whose son died in Afghanistan.  

On top of these issues, Biden is facing questions about his ability to govern due to his age. At 81 years old, Biden is the oldest president in U.S. history. Constant stumbles and a fragile manner of walking have added a layer of concern. 

NYTimes Calls Out Dem. Hypocrisy for Meddling while Claiming to ‘Defend Democracy’

Molly Bruns
-
0
NYTimes Calls Out Dem. Hypocrisy for Meddling while Claiming to ‘Defend Democracy’

(Molly Bruns, Headline USA) The New York Times published a piece calling out the Democrat party for meddling in the Republican Senate primary race in Ohio.

A Democratic group in the state paid for an ad emphasizing the conservative credentials of candidate Bernie Moreno, who received an endorsement from former President Donald Trump.

The ad accused Moreno of being a “MAGA Republican,” and called him “too conservative for Ohio,” which Times author Lisa Lerer argued likely made him more appealing to Ohio’s conservative voters.

Ohio voted for Trump in 2020, beating Biden by eight points. In 2022, JD Vance won a Senate seat by 6 points.

Despite the risky gambit, Democrats pushed Moreno under the belief that the political newcomer would be easier for incumbent Sen. Sherrod Brown to defeat than two other challengers with experience at the state level.

The Times criticized the Ohio Democrats for intervening, undercutting President Joe Biden’s 2024 primary message as he attempts to run on a campaign of fearmongering that Trump and those who support his agenda are too dangerous to be elected.

It noted that the Left had spent an estimated $53 million attempting to promote rival candidates they alleged were “election deniers” on the theory that it would boost Democrat chances in the general election.

Although the strategy appeared to pay off more often than not in the 2022 midterm race,  Democrat politicians and political strategists warned about the possible repercussions of this strategy.

“It is risky and unethical to promote any candidate whose campaign is based on eroding trust in our elections,” wrote nearly three dozen former Democratic House and Senate lawmakers in 2022. “Our democracy is fragile, therefore we cannot tolerate political parties attempting to prop up candidates whose message is to erode our dedication to fair elections.”

The Times also argued that prying into races like these in a historically Republican state was a dangerous game, whereas meddling in a solid-blue state would be more permissible.

The storied paper’s relationship with the Biden campaign has been on ice recently, with publishers and other officials with the Times letting slip that Biden officials met with reporters and lambasted them over their coverage.

Democrat Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., denounced the Times for daring to fact-check the president in an appearance on MSNBC.

“I move that every newspaper in America quits doing any fact-checks on Joe Biden until they fact-check Donald Trump every morning on the front page,” she continued. “It is ridiculous that the New York Times fact-checked Joe Biden on something.”

The recent Times article may have taken a subtle dig at McCaskill, suggesting that she helped pioneer the strategy of pushing ads to help promote a more conservative opponent in her 2012 race against former Rep. Todd Akin.

Although McCaskill succeeded in vanquishing Akin with a smear campaign that accused him of supporting rape, her plan backfired horrifically in the next election cycle, when conservative state Attorney General Josh Hawley stepped up to the plate and handily defeated her.

1...1,4031,4041,405...3,867Page 1,404 of 3,867