‘Under Obama, family median income dropped and Democratic Party imploded’


There was a great opportunity for the Democrats in 2008, but Obama’s policies have resulted in the Democratic Party now being on the verge of collapse, journalist Jack Rasmus told RT. Retired US Army GeneralPaul E. Vallely also provided his views.


On Tuesday Barack Obama gave his farewell presidential address in Chicago. He said America is in a “better, stronger place” than when he took office eight years ago. He also seemed hopeful about the future of the US.

RT: How do you think history will judge President Obama’s eight years in the White House?

Jack Rasmus: Well, I think his two greatest legacies, and there are a number of them are not that positive. One – on his watch here for the last eight years notwithstanding on the positive things he said about how we’re supposed to be better off than we were eight years ago, which is debatable – the biggest legacy is that certainly the wealthy have recovered very dramatically. Ninety-seven percent of all of the net income gains since 2008 have gone to the wealthiest one percent. Households, at the same time, the middle class, the median family income has continued to decline every year in real terms. I think that is going to be a legacy which is worse than under George W. Bush, and worse than under Clinton.

Any other legacy that people are not talking about is that on his watch, as the head of the Democratic Party, that party has almost imploded: roughly two-thirds of all the state legislatures and governorships are now in the hands of Republicans. Clearly, there was a great opportunity in 2008, and it was the Obama policies that have resulted in the Democratic Party being in such a bad shape. It may not even recover from here going forward. So those two things will be the primary legacies here.


Also, he kind of governed from Washington. He sat behind the desk. Unlike other presidents you didn’t see him that much on television giving speeches to the nation, trying to rally people around his policies and going out touring the country as other presidents have done to try to rally support.

He stayed in Washington behind the desk there and played it very cautious on a whole number of fronts. We see the result of that. The country is not better off, regardless of what he said. In a whole number of ways it’s worse off, it is more divided. His speech talked about solidarity because clearly, the country is very, very divided. Even his ratings are a little bit higher than they were two years ago. It was just two years ago that they were as bad as George W. Bush in 2008. So they couldn’t get much worse.

RT: Back in 2008, Barack Obama said he would “not waste a minute” in trying to resolve conflicts in the Middle East. Did he live up to that promise?

JR: Clearly, the Iran deal was something of a win, but the whole Middle East is on fire still, and that hasn’t been corrected. We’re still in a 16-year war in Afghanistan with the government their collapsing. We’re still fighting ISIS in Iraq. The foreign policy – we’re dangerously here arming Eastern Europe. The neocons and the US State Department ran amok on his watch in Ukraine and elsewhere, and he put a stake in the ground for a possible future confrontation with China. So foreign policy has not been the best of his records.


‘Delusional state of mind’

When you look at the economics, you look at the Middle East, you look at all the failures that we’ve had from a foreign policy standpoint, his presidency will go down as a failure, says Paul E. Vallely, retired US Army General.

RT: How do you think history will judge President Obama’s eight years in the White House?

Paul E Vallely: … I think the legacy will be that he has had a failure as a president over eight years. Many things are not as he explains it – I guess sort of living in what we call a delusional state of mind, not looking at the reality of the world. When you look at the economics, you look at the Middle East, you look at all the failures that we’ve had from a foreign policy standpoint, his presidency will go down as a failure in my opinion.

RT: In his speech, Obama said: “No foreign terrorist organization has successfully planned and executed an attack on our homeland these past eight years.” Do you think he has succeeded in reducing the terror threat?


PV: No, it is actually increased not only in the US and coming across to our borders and radicalizing a lot of – what we might call immigrants who have come into this country – plus others who have become a terror threat unto its own in our cities and in our neighborhoods. When you look at what’s happened in Europe, and throughout even the Middle East and Turkey, we’ve had an increase in radical Islamic terrorism. So it is not true that we’re better off than we were before. We’re actually under a bigger threat than ever.

RT: Do you think that is because of US foreign policy? Yesterday the director of the CIA said that the Obama administration made a mistake when it hoped to impose Western values and Western-style democracy in the Middle East during the Arab Spring. Do you think there is a link between foreign policy and the issues that you’ve just raised?

PV: Sure there is. When we look back, Iraq was never a real threat to the US. They were economically really in bad shape. So when Bush went into Iraq and Afghanistan, they attempted to do nation building, basically trying to bring some kind of democracy to those countries and cultures, which was really counter to Islam and Sharia law, and it would never have worked.

It was very naïve for our leaders to think we could go into the Middle East and make them into democracies. As we well know, democracy has to grow from within, not from without. This has been a very big issue in the US. Our foreign policy has not been well-thought out with vision and strategy that we need to have in order to help countries, not to get in and cause chaos and disturbance.

There has not been a smooth transition [of power] as he had with President [George W.] Bush. There’s been constant fake news put in the media and spread by broadcasting networks like CNN… this has created a lot of disturbances. But listen. President-elect Trump and his new cabinet, staff and transition team, they’re above it all. And they’re not stooping down to believe that any of this is going to have any effect on our new president in 10 days. It’s going to be a whole new different American that we’re going to see here.

‘Carter got wrong country when he said Russia had done zero in Syria’ – Russian Defense Ministry


Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu slammed Pentagon chief Ashton Carter for confusing the facts, after the US official said Russia’s contribution to fighting terrorism in Syria was “virtually zero.” Shoigu advised Carter to be more careful with his assessments.


“Yesterday I listened to a speech by one of my foreign counterparts… He said that Russia’s contribution to the struggle against terrorism in Syria and in the region was equal to zero. I might have subscribed to what he said in a sense only if: A, that counterpart of mine had not picked the wrong country; and, B, he had been more careful in his comments,” Shoigu said Tuesday at a meeting with the leadership of the Russian Defense Ministry.


In an interview on Sunday with NBC’s Meet the Press, US Secretary of Defense Carter claimed that Russia had done nothing in the fight against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) terrorists in Syria.

“They [Russia] haven’t done anything. They came in, they said they were going to fight ISIL, and they said they were going to help in the civil war in Syria. They haven’t done either of those things. As a consequence of course, we’re fighting ISIL ourselves,” Carter stated, adding that Moscow had achieved “virtually zero” in resolving the Syrian crisis.

Shoigu dismissed the statements, noting that Russian air forces in Syria had fulfilled their orders, while the forces of the international coalition had only succeeded in “turning things for the worse.”

“We have accomplished the main task that the supreme commander-in-chief had set to us last year,” Shoigu explained. “However hard it might have been for us, however greatly we might have needed support from the international coalition, which in fact has not only achieved nothing but even turned things for the worse, to our deep regret we saw no such support. And that task required us to apply all of our effort and ability, to dispatch a large group to Syria, including an aircraft carrier-led group and extra aerospace resources and military police as well.”

The US-led international coalition’s own strikes in Syria targeted everything but oil production facilities captured by IS terrorists, the Russian Defense Ministry said earlier, accusing Washington of leading yet another campaign to “methodically and steadily” destroy another sovereign country’s economic infrastructure.

US-led forces also killed dozens of Syrian government soldiers in an airstrike, despite Washington promising to avoid them when it intervened in the conflict. Washington then said the Syrian positions were targeted by mistake.


Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova also commented on Carter’s claims, at the same time referring to Monday’s statement by CIA Director John Brennan that Washington’s move to send troops to Iraq was “a contributing factor” to the instability in the Middle East and the rise of Islamic State.

“If we knew then what we know now in terms of what ISIL was able to do, in terms of just this explosive growth in Iraq that then was able to lop over into Syria, would we have pursued the same course? Probably not,” Brennan told CNN.

“Following the logic of American military officials, Russia is to blame for failing to fix Washington’s mistakes,” Zakharova said.

“Based on these statements, either key representatives of the Obama administration do not communicate with each other at all (for reasons we can only guess, although, knowing who were his closest associates in charge of the whole kitchen, this is not surprising), or this is simply a case of catastrophic stupidity. However, one does not exclude the other,” the spokeswoman wrote in a Facebook post.

Russia’s General Staff announced last week that Moscow had started to reduce its military presence in Syria, following a decision by President Vladimir Putin. The Russian naval task force led by the country’s sole aircraft carrier, the ‘Admiral Kuznetsov’, will be the first to leave the area of conflict.

Russia launched its anti-terrorist operation in Syria in September 2015, at the request of Syrian President Bashar Assad. On December 30, 2016, a comprehensive ceasefire was announced in the country after a truce agreement was reached by the Syrian government and armed opposition groups. Russia and Turkey are acting as the guarantors of the truce, which does not cover Islamic State and Al-Nusra Front terrorists.

Can We Trust Lying James Clapper On Russia Theory

Published on Jan 6, 2017

This is the same man whose WMD theory led to a war in Iraq and had no problem lying under oath about the NSA. Can we really take his assessment on Russia hacking at face value?

Pepito Rodriguez

Clapper is a traitor and the world will know the truth
Vidar Odinsson

No clapper you are the same lying bastard today as you were 13 years ago! PS. Why is a 75 year old in charge of anything but his incontinence pants?
Manley Nelson

Clapper acts as if lying about WMDs was just a little mistake that he had nothing to do with. How is he still working in “intelligence”?

I can’t wait to see the steaming pile of horse shit they pass off as evidence.
pooky marie

I swear these people are trying to start a war!!!! We voted for trump because we did not want to go war now that trump was elected they want to start the war and leave trump to take the fall these people need to be removed today! God help us all!!! I hope Putin is smart and does not fall for the trap!
Katie Secouler

they needed the time to make up FAKE documents…..
Jack Gerald

I say you could trust James Clapper just as much as the guy who signs his pay check.


Billionaire globalist pens panicked rant

Paul Joseph Watson | Infowars.com – DECEMBER 29, 2016

Billionaire globalist George Soros has penned a panicked rant in which he decries President-elect Donald Trump as a “would be dictator” who threatens the future of the new world order.

In an article for Project Syndicate, Soros begins by mentioning how he lived under both Nazi and then Soviet rule in Hungary before asserting that “various forms of closed societies – from fascist dictatorships to mafia states – are on the rise.”

This claim is confounded by the facts, which show that, “The share of the world population living in democracies (has) increased continuously.”

Soros writes that in voting for Trump, Americans “elected a con artist and would-be dictator as its president,” and that his defeat of Hillary Clinton means America will be “unable to protect and promote democracy in the rest of the world” (because that policy worked so well in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Libya).

Soros also slams Trump’s new cabinet as containing nothing other than “incompetent extremists” and “retired generals”.

Explaining how he supports the European Union because it is a successful attempt at “social engineering,” Soros laments the fact that the body has become “increasingly dysfunctional” and its disintegration has been accelerated, “first from Brexit, then from the election of Trump in the US, and on December 4 from Italian voters’ rejection, by a wide margin, of constitutional reforms.”

Soros also bemoans Russian President Vladimir Putin’s alleged undue influence during the presidential election.

“At first, he tried to control social media. Then, in a brilliant move, he exploited social media companies’ business model to spread misinformation and fake news, disorienting electorates and destabilizing democracies. That is how he helped Trump get elected,” writes Soros.

Soros says Putin “felt threatened by “color revolutions” in Georgia, Ukraine, and elsewhere,” without mentioning that Soros himself played a key role in bankrolling these contrived uprisings, as well as the color revolution being fomented against Trump.

The irony of an ultra-rich elitist who has bankrolled the overthrow of innumerable governments insisting he cares about “democracy” and the will of the people is particularly rich.

The whole tone of the piece is clearly fraught with concern that the populist movement sweeping the west poses a direct threat to the plutocratic new world order that Soros has spent his entire life helping to build.

He concludes by warning that “the EU is on the verge of breakdown” due to stagnant economic growth and the out of control refugee crisis (that Soros himself again helped create in the first place as a way to obtain political power).

Kid jihad: Is Europe threatened by child terrorists?

The Christmas market truck attack in Berlin overshadowed another case in Germany – the thwarted nail bomb plot in Ludwigshafen. Yet it marks the alarming trend of an increasingly young face of terrorism in Europe.


The 12-year-old boy behind the plot in western Germany unveiled last week intended to detonate a home-made explosive device filled with nails at a Christmas market, according to German media. He was described as being of Iraqi origin, radicalized and planning to join the terrorist group Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) sometime in the future.

The alleged failed bomb blast in Ludwigshafen is believed to be the youngest person in Europe detained on suspicion of terrorism since IS rose to prominence in the Middle East. The case however is far from being isolated.

Earlier in December, two teenagers aged 15 and 17 were arrested in the southern German state of Baden-Wurttemberg. They reportedly planned Islamism-motivated gun attacks in several locations near Frankfurt and were in the process of procuring firearms for them.

The issue of youth radicalization is serious in Germany. A September report by the Interior Ministry to the Parliament said German law enforcement identified over 340 cases of radical preachers making contacts with refugees in Germany. The ministry said unaccompanied children were especially susceptible to the radical messages.

Minors now comprise 7 percent of all German jihadists who left for Syria and Iraq, says a report jointly prepared by the Hessian Information and Competence Centre against Extremism (HKE), the German Federal Criminal Police, and the Domestic Intelligence Service (BfV), Die Welt reported in November.


Other Western countries have the same problem. French authorities in September arrested three teens suspected of links to jihadists and planning attacks in the country. All of them were 15, including one who had a birthday just days before his arrest.

In Austria, four suspected would-be terrorists as young as 16 inspired by IS were arrested in May. The police said the teens were planning attacks in Antwerp and were involved in recruiting on behalf of the terrorist group.

On the opposite side of Earth in Australia, two 16-year-old boys were arrested in October on suspicion of planning IS-inspired knife attacks.

In countries closer to IS strongholds in Syria and Iraq the situation is worse. In August, a Kurdish wedding ceremony was targeted by a child aged 12 to 14 years, according to the investigators. The bombing claimed over 50 lives.

The same week a boy of the same age went on a suicide mission in the Iraqi city of Kirkuk, but was apprehended by the security forces.

IS is well-known for using underage boys and girls as both soldiers and suicide bombers. Dubbed ‘cubs of caliphate’ these radicalized children are increasingly becoming victims of the terrorist organization.

READ MORE: ISIS use of children for suicide missions skyrocketing – US report

Apparently, this is increasingly true for countries where terrorists’ ability to brainwash children are limited.

Obama Accelerates Somali and Syrian Refugee Resettlement in the U.S. During His Last 30 Days



As the clock ticks down on the Obama Reign of Terror, he’s working overtime on his fundamental transformation of America.

A new report on immigration reveals Obama is accelerating resettlement of Somali and Syrian “refugees” in the U.S. during his last 30 days in office.

God help us.

From WND:

Through the first 11 weeks of fiscal year 2017, the United States welcomed 23,428 individuals as “refugees,” according to the Refugee Processing Center. At this rate, the U.S. will resettle roughly 110,580 this fiscal year, which would exceed President Obama’s target of 110,000.
Contrast that with last year, when the U.S. welcomed only 13,786 “refugees” through the first 11 weeks of FY 2016. The country would end up welcoming 84,995 by fiscal year’s end.
Leo Hohmann, a veteran journalist and WND news editor, sees this as part of a “concerted effort” by the Obama administration to admit as many as possible before Donald Trump becomes president.
“Get them here before Trump takes office on Jan. 20, because you don’t know exactly what Trump will do with regard to this controversial program,” is how Hohmann summarized the current administration’s attitude. “The left is in panic mode because this program has run on autopilot for 35 years, and now for the first time we have a president who has expressed an interest in taking a hard, critical look at how it is run and the effects it’s had on our cities, states and country.”
The program to which Hohmann refers is the U.S. State Department’s Refugee Admissions Program, which he writes about extensively in his brand-new book “Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest Through Immigration and the Resettlement Jihad.”
This program does not need to be renewed each year; it has run on autopilot since Congress passed and President Jimmy Carter signed the Refugee Act of 1980. However, the president has the authority to set an annual ceiling on the total number of refugees admitted, as well as to determine which nationalities and how many of each to let in.
Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, America’s independent news network.
While Obama has set his sights on admitting 110,000 refugees this fiscal year, Daniel Horowitz, senior editor at Conservative Review, noted Trump can block the roughly 80,000 who are scheduled to come in after he takes office.
“To begin with, §212(f) of [the] Immigration and Nationality Act gives the president unilateral authority at will to shut down any form of immigration under any circumstance,” Horowitz explained in a recent column. “In particular, §207 delegated to the president full authority to set the number of refugees to be admitted in a given year. Thus, Trump can easily shut down refugee resettlement through executive action on day one of his administration.”
Hohmann holds a similar hope the president-elect will use his executive power to curtail the refugee resettlement program.
“Trump could decide to put in place a complete moratorium on all refugee resettlement from Muslim-majority nations like Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia and Iraq, or he could significantly slow up the influx from these countries using what he calls ‘extreme vetting,’” Hohmann advised.
He explained those are the “big four” that have been the source of a steady flow of Shariah-compliant Muslims into the U.S. since the 1980s.
Through the first 11 weeks of this fiscal year (Oct. 1 through Dec. 17), the U.S. admitted 3,074 refugees from Syria, according to data from the Refugee Processing Center. This puts the nation on track to welcome more than 14,500 Syrians by the end of the fiscal year. Meanwhile, at this point in FY 2016, the U.S. had only admitted 674 Syrian refugees on its way to admitting 12,587 for the whole year.
And more than 97 percent of the Syrian refugees admitted so far this fiscal year are Muslims, as were more than 99 percent of Syrians admitted last year.
Hohmann said the U.S. has had the opposite of “extreme vetting” of Syrians over the past eight years.
“It’s gone from slack to even slacker,” he observed. “Back in the spring, Obama cut the screening period on Syrian refugees from 18-24 months down to three months by sending more screeners to the United Nations camps in Jordan and setting up a template that basically takes the refugees’ story of who they are and runs a search of social media and government databases to see if they can refute that story.
“Since there is little to no law enforcement data available on people who claim to be Syrians and false passports are easily purchased on the black market, we have no idea who these people are coming to our country as so-called Syrian refugees.”
While many Americans worry about the influx of Syrians, the U.S. has taken in even more refugees from Somalia this year. Through the first 11 weeks of FY 2017, the U.S. resettled 3,269 Somali refugees. At this rate, the country would absorb more than 15,550 by fiscal year’s end. At this point in FY 2016, the U.S. had only admitted 1,721 Somali refugees on its way to taking in 9,020 for the year.
More than 99.9 percent of the Somalis admitted this fiscal year are Muslims, as was the case in FY 2016 as well.
Hohmann noted Somali refugees are probably an even bigger risk than Syrians, as Somalis have committed several terrorist attacks on U.S. soil recently.
“There’s been no debate in Congress or the media asking the obvious questions: Why is America still taking thousands of refugees every year from Somalia more than 25 years after that country’s civil war broke out?” Hohmann asked. “How many is too many, and why aren’t the Somalis doing a better job of assimilating? Dozens have gone off to fight for overseas terror organizations while even more have been charged, tried and convicted here at home of providing material support to overseas terrorists.”
Horowitz, the author of “Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges From Transforming America,” pointed out the U.S. is bringing in Somali refugees at a record pace, even though Somalia collapsed more than two decades ago.
“Think about this: We’ve brought in 3,000 Somalis in just two-and-a-half months,” Horowitz wrote. “That is outpacing our typical 8,000-10,000 that we’ve unprecedentedly brought in almost every year for over two decades. Thousands more have come from other countries in the Middle East and North Africa. Clearly, Obama is trying to front-load refugee resettlement and set it in motion for the remainder of the fiscal year, even after he leaves office.”
Horowitz acknowledged Minnesota and Ohio continue to be pumped full of Somali refugees even though Minneapolis and Columbus have had terror recruitment problems within their Somali communities. What’s more, Obama’s “fundamental transformation” of America has continued as relatively large numbers of Somali and Syrian refugees have been planted in small-to-mid-sized cities such as Bowling Green, Kentucky; Owensboro, Kentucky; and Erie, Pennsylvania.
But Obama has no right to concentrate so many refugees in one place, according to Horowitz.
“This is a clear violation of the refugee law,” he admonished. “The statute directs the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) to ‘insure that a refugee is not initially placed or resettled in an area highly impacted by the presence of refugees or comparable populations.’ When making this determination the director of ORR is supposed to take into account, among other things, ‘the proportion of refugees and comparable entrants in the population in the area.’ [8 U.S.C. 1522]”
Texas leads all states in terms of receiving refugees so far this fiscal year, having welcomed 2,217. Hohmann said Texas has spent the last 10 to 12 years being inundated with refugees.
“Despite Gov. Greg Abbott’s decision to pull his state out of the federal resettlement program, the refugees just keep coming,” he lamented. “Amarillo, Texas, has been particularly hard hit, and I go into the situation there in some detail in my book.
“It’s important to remember that the resettlement program has not been supported solely by Democrats, but also Chamber of Commerce Republicans who see it as yet another avenue for the importation of cheap foreign labor. We’ve seen many Republican governors, for instance, support the program enthusiastically. Governors like Nikki Haley in South Carolina, John Kasich in Ohio, Rick Snyder in Michigan, they’ve all been on board with the program.”
In fact, seven of the top 10 refugee-receiving states so far this year were ones that voted for Trump on Nov. 8 (Texas, Arizona, Michigan, Ohio, Georgia, Pennsylvania and Kentucky). Only three of the top refugee destinations (California, New York and Washington) voted for Hillary Clinton.
Ann Corcoran, a leading refugee watchdog who authors the Refugee Resettlement Watch blog, told WND she believes the Obama administration and the federal resettlement contractors are deliberately trying to turn red states blue by injecting them with refugees who are likely to vote for Democrats.
“Of course it would take a while with refugee numbers, but add in the illegals, et cetera, in those states and, yes, it is about turning the state,” Corcoran said. “Consider it the California model – it worked there!”
Hohmann said while he can’t prove the State Department and the federal contractors have targeted red states over blue ones, it wouldn’t surprise him. But he warned that the availability of housing is the biggest factor in determining the placement of refugees.
“They are bringing the refugees in so fast right now that it’s difficult to find places to house them,” he revealed. “I’ve been hearing stories from my sources that some are being secretly housed in Muslim-owned hotels and being held there until openings can be found in local apartment complexes. Housing is always the key for this program. That’s why I often tell people to be wary of government-subsidized housing projects being built in your city because this is often a precursor to refugee resettlement, especially if you have a liberal mayor at the helm of your city.”