Evil Progressive Donors: The Four-Part Series

Former Senate majority leader Harry Reid attacked billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch almost daily from the floor of the U.S Senate --- 134 times to be exact --- vilifying their efforts and donations to elect conservative candidates. He even labeled such private citizens as "unAmerican." Despite his distaste for politically active billionaires, Reid and his counterparts regularly accept hordes of money from billionaire supporters. According to the federal election commission, Democrats raised $250 million more than Republicans in 2014. In fact, you'd have to go back to the election of 2004 to find Republicans outperforming Democrats in fundraising. In this serial, we follow the trail of cash leading to the most influential progressive donors, revealing the true agenda behind their donations.

Listen to the full series on Evil Progressive Donors:

Evil Progressive Donors Part I: Soros

Perhaps the most disturbing of all radical Democratic billionaire donors is the Fabian socialist, George Soros, who openly seeks a new world order and financial world order. Soros is openly anti-American, anti-Constitution and actively seeks to correct the "flaw" that "only Americans have a vote in Congress."

In his book, The Age of Infallibility: Consequences of the War on Terror, Soros wrote, "The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States." Soros believes capitalism is the enemy of the open society he envisions, and his solution is to turn to regulated markets not governed by capitalism. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Soros said, "The main enemy of the open society, I believe, is no longer the communists, but the capitalist threat."

How can American politicians accept huge sums of money from anyone who feels this way about America and capitalism, let alone a foreign-born billionaire with the power and influence wielded by George Soros?

Soros made his first billion dollars in 1992 by shorting the British pound and bankrupting the Bank of England. He accomplished this by leveraging billions in financial bets on the backs of hard-working British citizens who immediately saw their homes severely devalued and life savings cut drastically almost overnight. He also nearly collapsed the economies of Russia and Myanmar and Malaysia. He helped break down Czechoslovakia, brought on regime change in Croatia, Yugoslavia and Slovakia, and financed the orange revolution in Ukraine.

Soros admittedly enjoys collapsing the governments and economies of sovereign nations and, in fact, finds it "fun." While he strongly condemned the United States for intervening in Iraq and Afghanistan, he has no qualms about inserting himself into the internal affairs of other nations. In his 1987 book, The Alchemy of Finance, Soros explained his omnipotent behavior stating, "I admit that I've always harbored an exaggerated view of my self-importance, to put it bluntly. I fancied myself as some kind of god."

From 2001 to 2010, the total donated by Charles and David Coke as individuals to the federal election cause was 1.5 million. For George Soros, it was 32.5 million, nearly 22 times as much. Taking into account Soros organizations like Open Society, the amount skyrockets to more than $7 billion given to radical left-wing causes, including U.S. elections.

According to the U.S News and World Report, the Koch brothers plan to sit out the 2016 election season without donating one dime. In December, George Soros donated $6 million to the leading super PAC supporting Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. The massive check marks the return of the billionaire finance year as among the biggest givers in all of American politics.

Soros also funds a myriad of radical left-wing organizations like the Center for American Progress, MoveOn.Org, the Working Families Party and the Southern Poverty Law Center, a group that put historian David Barton on their terrorist list.

Some Americans may wonder, with innocent-sounding names like the "working families party," how could they be radicals? Fellow Fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw described the Fabian methodology: Use "methods of stealth, intrigue, subversion and the deception of never calling socialism by its right name."

Evil Progressive Donors Part II: The Steyer Brothers

It's likely you've never heard of the Steyer brothers. However, Jim Steyer and his billionaire brother Tom have donated millions --- if not hundreds of millions of dollars --- to their favorite Democratic causes. While progressive liberals regularly attack Republican donors, Democrat donors get a pass. Why? Because big money donors like Tom and Jim Steyer support liberal causes and candidates.

Tom Steyer, formerly an "evil" hedge fund manager and "villainous" executive at Goldman Sachs, donated $5 million in 2014 to the Senate majority super PAC run by Harry Reid's former aides --- a drop in the bucket to his pledge of $100 million to influence elections and kill the Keystone pipeline. He wound up donating about $75 million and was, by far, the largest single individual spender in the midterm elections. Liberal Michael Bloomberg was a distant second at $40 million.

Despite donating millions to liberal causes and elections, Steyer has been an outspoken critic of the Supreme Court decision to allow big money to enter politics, describing Democrat donors as the "small shepherd boy with five rocks and a sling" compared to a Goliath-sized Republican money-making machine. However, the facts belie this claim.

In 2008, according to the ABC news, then Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama raised and spent over $770 million compared to challenger John McCain's $238 million --- more than triple. In 2012, President Obama became the first candidate in the history of the world to raise over $1 billion --- $1,123,000,000 to be exact. According to a political analysis of the top 100 donors during the midterm election, Democrats received $174 million and Republicans received $40 million. Democratic donors routinely gave more to political campaigns while supporting the perception that Republicans buy elections.

Tom Steyer's biggest crusade has been climate change, despite the fact his vast fortune was made primarily from huge investments in oil and coal. One major investment was a pipeline rivaling the Keystone pipeline. When his heavy investments in oil, coal and competing pipelines came to the attention of the media, he instructed brokers to divest from all fossil fuels. Doubt still remains as to whether the divestment ever took place.

It has been estimated that Steyer funded over the years CO2 production equivalent to about 28% of the total amount of CO2 produced in the United States by coal burned for electricity generation. Additionally, his personal "footprint" matches the size of his bank account.

Steyer's primary home overlooks the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco --- on each of its three stories. With an estimated value of $11.7 million, the home sits on a cliff with beautiful vistas, wrecking the area for all wildlife. He also has a second home in San Francisco for a total combined 11,000 square feet in the city. Add to that his humble, $8.5 million beach home in Marin County, his $2.6 million Sugar Bowl ski resort home in California and two homes at a Lake Tahoe ski resort, respectively valued at $15 million and a more modest $1.1 million. And last, but not least, Steyer owns a 2,000-acre California ranch --- worth an estimated $23 to $50 million --- where his wife keeps her show horses.

No honest capitalist would begrudge a billionaire of his luxuries. But when said billionaire makes a massive carbon footprint while preaching about catastrophic climate change and spending tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to influence elections and climate legislation, that sounds more like a man living in a glass house, casting around some mighty big stones.

Evil Progressive Donors Part III: Hollywood

Democrats complain they just can't keep up with the horrific spending of the evil Republican machine. Yet, for more than a decade Democrats nearly always out raise and out spend Republicans. One of their primary sources of cash is, of course, Hollywood, and the leading man of donations is Jeffery Katzenberg, CEO of DreamWorks.

President Obama spoke fondly of Katzenberg in 2013 at DreamWorks, calling him "a great friend." He should consider Katzenberg a great friend. In May of 2012, Katzenberg co-hosted a fundraiser for President Obama at the home of actor George Clooney. The event raised almost $15 million, making it the most profitable presidential fundraiser in history.

Katzenberg was reportedly the largest bundler of contributions for President Obama's two presidential campaigns, but were his efforts purely altruistic? Did Katzenberg's desire to build a DreamWorks movie studio in China influence his pocketbook? Interestingly, the deal was fast-tracked by the White House, according to the Sunlight Foundation. Oriental DreamWorks is scheduled to open in Shanghai next year in a $2.7 billion complex featuring cinemas, shopping areas, galleries, hotels, restaurants and the world's largest IMAX screen.

In the 2016 election cycle, Katzenberg and Steven Spielberg tied at the top of the largest donors list at just over $1 million each, all going to Hillary Clinton and her super PACs. JJ Abrams is the next at over $500,000 donated to Hillary Clinton. Way behind the top three is Kelsey Grammer, who gave $500,000 to both Ben Carson and Rand Paul. The donor list from Business Insider also includes Beyonce, Leonardo DiCaprio and Kanye West --- all Clinton donors. Danny DeVito gave to Martin O'Malley and Bernie Sanders. Tom Hanks is a Clinton donor as are a bevy of stars --- Elton John, Katy Perry, Julianne Moore and Jamie Foxx --- who performed at a concert for Hillary.

A report from The Los Angeles Times last year noted that 90% of all Hollywood donations went to Hillary Clinton. Hollywood is all about the progressive movement.

Ironically, some of these financially-blessed stars struggle morally with the massive amounts of cash they flush into the political system. For example, George Clooney, who hosted a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton at $350,000 per couple, called the amount of money obscene. They decry income inequality, yet charge $350,000 per couple to attend a multimillion-dollar event for an elitist politician living a lavish lifestyle far out of the reach of her constituents.

While Hollywood's elite bemoan the amount of money in politics, they regularly raise more for Democrats than Republicans.

Evil Progressive Donors Part IV: Labor Unions

Sixty percent of the top billionaires contributing to political causes are Democrats or progressive liberals. Flying under the radar are the largest political donors on planet earth: unions.

Unions top the list of organizations donating to political causes --- and large corporations are behind them. Fourteen of the top 25 political donors are unions, and virtually all donate exclusively to Democratic candidates.

Democrats also have the largest single donor source of any kind over the past 25 years: a PAC called ActBlue. Launched in 2004, ActBlue has amassed an incredible fortune of $1.1 billion, with only $100 million spent thus far.

Massive labor unions like SEIU wield enormous power and spend vast amounts electing candidates that further their agenda. And if going through legals channels doesn't suit their purposes, they're more than willing to use other means. Former SEIU president Andy Stern has said, "We've been trying to use the power of persuasion, and if that doesn't work, we use the persuasion of power, because there are governments and there are opportunities to change laws..."

Stern and SEIU have unabashedly put up tens, even hundreds of millions of dollars, for government healthcare and amnesty. Stern, the president of an international union, was the top visitor at the White House during Obama's first year in office, with a record 22 visits. AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka visited the White House two to three times weekly and talked daily to someone in the White House. No one else has had that kind of to President Obama, including most members of Obama's cabinet, some of whom have had zero contact with him.

SEIU tops the list of labor union donors at $232 million, with 99 percent going to Democrats. The National Education Association is second, followed by the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. Then the Farr Group, an executive search consulting firm. The Carpenters Union and the American Federation of Teachers round out the top six groups for political contributors, all of which gave nearly every dime to Democrats. In fact, eight of the top ten, and 18 out of the top 25 are Democratic donors.

Believe it or not, the NRA has also donated to Democrats. Of the $22 million donated since 2002, 17 precent has gone to Democrats.

Listen to all serials at glennbeck.com/serials.

Glenn created "The Senate Fails to Condemn INFANTICIDE" in response to the Senate not passing Nebraska Senator Ben Sasses' bill banning infanticide early this year. In an effort to help support pro-life charities, Glenn first posted this for sale on eBay before being banned multiple times before we finally had enough and put it up for sale on bidpal.net.

At the time of this post, the bid was up to $4,700 — but we can do better than that. Please help us raise money for a good cause, you don't even have to display it anywhere in your home, you can just keep it in storage or something! If you want this priceless piece created by one of the most influential people in the world of art, place your bids here.

Can you remember the economic crisis of 2008 and how you felt when the news broke that Lehman Brothers had collapsed? I have found an economic threat that everyone needs to be aware of, so you can prepare yourself in case we see another 2008 type collapse. I am going to present the evidence to you and I urge you to verify everything and to form your own opinion.

What is that threat?

It is a bank called Deutsche Bank. They are by far the most dominant bank in Germany which is the world's fourth-largest economy. In 2018 they had €2.08 Trillion worth of assets and the second-placed bank (DZ Bank) had €506 Billion worth of assets. To show you how dominant this bank is, they have more assets than the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th sized banks combined.
When we review a business there are three key parts to analysis:

  • Market sentiment
  • Business numbers
  • Technical Analysis

Market Sentiment

Deutsche Bank has a long history of potential scandals including going all the way back to World War 2 and dealing in Nazi gold. Below are five recent stories which have increased the negative sentiment around Deutsche Bank.

  1. In 2007, they purchased a portfolio of loans worth $7.8 billion and purchased insurance from Warren Buffets Company. It was discovered they did not set aside enough capital to cover any potential losses. Over the course of the ten years, they lost $1.6 billion, and when they sold the loan they did not update their financial statements to include the big loss
  2. The Panama Papers are an ongoing investigation looking for many things including offshore tax havens. These investigations have resulted in several heads of state resigning including in Iceland and Pakistan. Last November, 170 police raided 6 different offices in Frankfurt looking for evidence of money laundering.
  3. Estonia is a small country in Eastern Europe. It has a population of 1.3 million people and a GDP of €26 billion. In January, it was discovered Deutsche Bank got involved with a Danish bank called Danke Bank and processed over $230 billion worth of cross country payments (including from Soviet Russia) through one bank in Estonia.
  4. There have been rumors of issues with Deutsche for a while now and one of the solutions put forth was a merger with a bank called CommerzBank. The leaders of both companies met and they even got support from politicians. In April, news broke that the merger talks had failed because over worries the risks and costs would be too great.
  5. Last week in France, Investment banking boss Garth Ritchie and others were arrested in France over illicit tax transactions.

Business Numbers

Deutsche Bank is already struggling as they are losing staff, losing market share, and bonuses are expected to be down at least 10% and further rounds of cost-cutting to come. Now imagine the impact if business costs start going up.

The banking industry works in a very simple way. They raise funds through large bonds at low-interest rates and then sell those funds to business and individuals thru products like loans and credit cards at a higher interest rate which results in a potential profit.

Earlier this year, Deutsche Bank tried raising money through several bonds. They paid 180bp (basis points) on a two-year bond and 230bp on a seven-year bond. Let me put this in context for you. There is a small bank in Spain called Caixabank which paid 225bp on a five-year bond and one of the larger banks in Spain, BBVA paid 130bp on a five-year bond.

  • How and why is a small bank in Spain getting a better deal on bonds than a huge bank in Germany?
  • Why is a large bank in Spain getting a bond 100bp cheaper than a German bank?
  • What does the market know that we do not?

Stock Price

Deutsche is also missing revenue projections which further hurt the business ability to survive and prosper. As you can imagine all of this news has a deep and lasting impact on its stock price which is in deep trouble. Before I share the stock price, I need to put this into the context of the market and the industry compared to the big economic crash of 2008. Below you will see a chart of some banking stocks from around the world with their peak price prior to the 2008 crash, the low of the 2008 recession and the price today:

As you can see from the above chart the banks in America have recovered from the 2008 recession by anywhere up 375% and JP Morgan has not only recovered its price in full but is constantly setting new high's. Ireland went bankrupt and had to be bailed out by the EU/IMF following the 2008 crash and even our national bank has more than doubled its price since 2008. The worst performing bank I could find was Societe Generale which has issues but is still hovering around its 2008 low price levels.

Now let's put that into the context of Deutsche Bank. Not only has the stock not rebounded but it is over 65% below its 2008 low at $6.75.

Technical Analysis

When you are dealing with the stock market, you also have people who study pricing through technical analysis. Experts look at things like FIB sequences, trend lines, and support levels. Support levels are a key metric for a stock failing because are looking to find where it will find support and potentially bounce higher.

We are very close to a key support level ($6.40) and if the price goes below this level, there is no saying exactly how low the price could go. At least one company expects Deutsche to fall below this support level, as several weeks ago UBS downgraded the stock to a sell order. This news was compounded last Friday when rating agency Fitch, downgraded their credit rating to BBB or two levels above JUNK status.

Other Information

I know you are likely reading this and thinking "this bank must have smart people in charge and surely they have a plan, right?" I am sure there is a plan and while they have kept their cards close to their chest, they have spoken in the past about the areas they foresee having growth for the company – they include business in Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Egypt. Do they strike you as countries which are stable and will offer steady and reliable growth? Do you have to think really hard to imagine how this could go potentially very wrong?

Questions

I believe there is at least a solid case Deutsche is in a LOT of trouble. So what are possible scenarios for the future? I will lay out the key questions below but I must stress that it's impossible to say for sure what exactly will happen. One of the key numbers to remember here is they have roughly €50 billion worth of derivatives.

  • How likely is it that the bank can turn things around and survive?
  • How likely is it the bank continues to run into trouble, its stock price fails and eventually fails?
  • If you think it is likely it will fail, the question becomes what will the fallout be? Who will be affected?
  • Will they be bailed out?
  • If so, by whom? The German government, ECB, IMF, the Federal Reserve?
  • What will the German government think? Some members recently spoke out saying they would block public money for the proposed merger? Will they block funds if it failed?
  • Will other banks be exposed and affected? Will they have to take losses?
  • Will those losses be spread around or will one or more bank be mainly affect?
  • Will this affect the sentiment of the banking sector and cause a panic?
  • If there are issues and it starts affecting the stock prices, what will be the impact on other industries?

Last Question

The last question revolves solely around the banks and the regulators? How secure are the other banks? We all hear about how banks are now put through "stress tests" but how much trust do you put in those results? How much trust do you have in the regulators?

I know this may make me sound like a conspiracy theorist to some but it's an honest question. The Fed is on public record saying they want to keep this economy strong as long as possible. If a bank did not perform strongly in a stress test or even barely failed one, do you think they would report it?

Can you imagine the pressure that body would come under to stay silent? Can you imagine the rhetoric they would face with questions like, "Are you really going to fail one bank? Do you know how many people will lose their jobs if you do that?" Am I saying this is happening? No, but can you really rule it out 100% as a possibility?

I urge you to ponder on these questions, do your own research and find YOUR answers.

Update: The most freaquently asked question I have received from this column / show is how much time do we have to prepare. This is an impossible question to answer, as it could fail tomorrow, next week or might be next year. However I want to provide you a potential date for your diary – July 24th. That is when Deutsche will release their next earnings report and if it comes in below expectations, it could cause a further drop in price casting more doubt over the future viability of the bank.

Please support Jonathon's weekly podcast which is exclusive to the Blaze Media and available for FREE. He offers a unique perspective by promoting America's Founding Principles and brings every issue back to a set of core principles which are always based around the laws of nature. You can find links to his show by clicking here or by searching for Freedoms Disciple on your favorite audio platform.

Survey: Where do you stand on these conspiracy theories?

Thought Catalog / Unsplash

Have you seen this survey on the most-believed conspiracy theories in America?

It's no surprise the survey has been getting so much attention. The results are actually a pretty disturbing.

Infographic: Belief in Conspiracy Theories in the United States | Statista

I decided to put together a quick survey of my own, with slightly different wording.

Up-vote the ones you agree with and down-vote the ones you disagree with.

I believe Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK alone. However, I would not be surprised to find out the government sealed evidence that others were involved.

If by "deep state" you mean long-time Washington power brokers who are used to calling the shots and now feel threatened by Donald Trump not listening to their advice or council — yes, I do believe that many people like that are working against him and his administration.

Whether alien bodies are in Area 51 or not, I do believe the government knows more about UFOs than they have told us.

I do not believe the U.S. government was involved in 9/11, but as we know, NSA advisor Sandy Berger was caught destroying documents from the national archives related to both Bush and Clinton. All U.S. administrations have been to close to the Saudis, and the Saudis were involved in 9/11 at some level.

I believe the climate is always changing — it's natural. I would be willing to accept that man MAY play a role in this. But I do not believe in the solutions currently being discussed, nor do I believe the intention of most political activists are pure.

Any talk of the Illuminati provides the true dangers to man's freedom — like very powerful NGOS and men like George Soros — a perfect cover.

The U.S. government has done some horrible experiments on people and land — I also suspect they will do more things in the future. But I do not believe in the systematic spraying of chemicals using chemtrails.

The moon landing was real, but I see a time coming when people will not be able to trust their eyes due to deep fakes.

What do you think?

Let me know in the comments section below.