Latest news with #HillaryClinton
Chicago Tribune
4 hours ago
- Business
- Chicago Tribune
Letters: Why would Illinois want to be like Texas? Consider these statistics.
The editorial on Texas tax cuts would have us believe everything is bigger in Texas due to its low taxation. Yet, I can name a few basic benefits we should all expect to be afforded in a prosperous society, which are, in fact, very scarce in Texas. Want to live in a state where you're assured of basic quality health care? Don't move to Texas, which, unlike Illinois, refused the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion and, as a result, has the highest uninsured rate in the country, according to the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey. Want to live in a state that provides your children access to a quality education? Again, don't move to Texas, where, according to the Education Data Initiative, Texas invests one third less in their pupils than Illinois. ACT scores were five points higher in Illinois compared with Texas in 2024, according to the ACT. Want to live in a state that acknowledges the effects of climate change and does all it can to protect you from its pernicious effects? Moving to Texas will put you on a collision course with climate change's dangers, as evidenced by the millions of Texans left without power in the freezing winter during the deadly 2021 energy grid crisis due to a lack of regulatory oversight. Additionally, more than 130 lives may have been saved in the recent flash flood disaster in Texas had its leaders chosen to invest in siren networks and flood alert systems. While the Tribune Editorial Board would have you believe Texas' lower taxation leads to a windfall of savings for its residents, when accounting for the higher median incomes of Illinois residents and Illinois' superior social safety net, this claim turns out to be weak. A 2023 Council for Community and Economic Research report showed that while Texas's nominal cost of living was 7% to 10% lower than Illinois, the difference in effective purchasing power for the average family was only 2% to 3% lower. I know I am willing to pay 2% to 3% more to ensure my family benefits from better health care, stronger educational opportunities and improved disaster readiness to help us live longer and more fulfilling to the Tribune Editorial Board for continuing to promote the Republican Party line: tax cuts good and tax hikes bad ('Texas is talking tax cuts. Illinois? More hikes,' July 23) . It was one of the most tone-deaf editorials the board has done since it endorsed third-party candidate Gary Johnson over Hillary Clinton in 2016. I know we have short attention spans these days, but is the board really going to hold up as a role model the state where 138 people just died from floods because of a lack of infrastructure investment that could have been paid for with taxes? The state where 246 people died in 2021 when its power grid failed, also for lack of investment in infrastructure? The state that ranks second worst in the country for quality of life in 2025, according to CNBC? The CNBC article states that 'according to the United Health Foundation, Texas has the nation's lowest number of primary care doctors per capita, the second-lowest number of mental health providers, and it consistently has the highest rate of people without health insurance. The state has among America's strictest abortion bans, and crime is on the high side.' And regarding the abortion bans, was the editorial board aware of the following statistics? According to the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 'between 2021 and 2022, infant deaths in Texas rose from 1,985 to 2,240. … This corresponds to a 12.9 percent increase in infant deaths in Texas versus a 1.8 percent increase in infant deaths in the rest of the U.S. during the same period.' Public education, according to the World Population Review? Texas is 40th; Illinois is 17th. So go ahead, editorial board, continue to glorify tax cuts and encourage Illinois to become more like Texas, a state that chooses policies that kill people by default. Me? I will continue to cheer on our governor and other local and state officials who use the taxes they raise to give Illinois citizens a solid quality of Brandon Johnson has ruled out a property tax increase and instead is looking for 'progressive revenue.' The mayor once was a teacher, but he seems incapable of learning lessons from history. The facts are clear: High taxes drive people out of cities and states. Tens of thousands of residents left Illinois each year from 2019 to 2024, and high taxes were a major reason for many. Illinois only avoided losing population due to immigration, largely people from Venezuela. In the old Soviet Union, the system controlled where people could live and work. China has the system of household registration, severely limiting educational and job opportunities and access to services to residents who do not stay in their assigned permanent residency. Thankfully, in the United States, people are free to choose where to live. The mayor was cagey about what specifically 'progressive revenue' means. It is worth considering what taxes Chicagoans already pay. In addition to federal and state taxes, the sales tax in Chicago, a portion of which goes to the state, is 10.25%, among the highest of American cities. Property taxes are already higher than the national average. There are real estate taxes, utility and telecom taxes, amusement taxes, hotel taxes, restaurant taxes, alcohol taxes, a shopping bag tax and cannabis taxes. Businesses are struggling because of high taxes. Tax the wealthy? Fueling the exodus of wealthy taxpayers will further weaken the tax base. Wealthy corporations? Boeing, Caterpillar, Citadel, Tyson Foods and others have already left. A bailout from Springfield or Washington is a pipe dream. Borrow more money? The debt per taxpayer is already among the highest in the country. There is only one responsible option for Chicago: Cut expenses. Unfortunately, the mayor lacks the nerve to do Harvey grapples with mounting debt, it recently made the difficult — but fiscally responsible — decision to lay off 10% of its workforce. And what has Mayor Brandon Johnson and Gov. JB Pritzker done to address the finances of Chicago and the state, respectively? Johnson has not addressed this city's bloated workforce. Instead, he told the city's contractors to reduce their charges and advocated for the Bring Chicago Home initiative, which would have raised the real estate transfer tax on the wealthy and corporations, spurred their departures and ultimately reduced the city's tax base. Likewise, Pritzker has not addressed this state's dismal pension and financial outlook. He has yet to address this state's number of governmental bodies — more than 8,500 — and attendant costs, which are more than even more populous states. Instead, our governor advocated for a graduated income tax scheme, which would have had the same effect as Bring Chicago Home, and now he simply baits President Donald Trump in national forums. Chicago needs to reduce municipal expenditures by examining and eliminating its bloated workforce, and it further needs to consider the need for 50 wards and aldermen and the attendant expenses. And Illinois needs to get its financial house in order by consolidating and/or eliminating some of its more than 8,500 governmental bodies. The elimination of bloated workforces and governmental bodies would be to the benefit of overburdened and overextended taxpayers and thus would be in the public interest.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - Clinton exposed as Russiagate source? CIA's Ratcliffe teases more docs coming
CIA Director John Ratcliffe is stepping into the fray, backing up claims by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard that Russiagate's origins can now be tied directly to a coterie of intelligence officials and also to former President Barack Obama. Obama allegedly directed those officials — James Comey, John Brennan and James Clapper — to reach stronger conclusions about Russia's impact on the 2016 election, even though they knew there was no hacking. Now Ratcliffe says then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was also involved. 'What hasn't come out yet and what's gong to come out is the underlying intelligence that I have spent the last few months making recommendations about — final declassification and sent that to the Department of Justice that will come out in the John Durham report classified annex,' Ratcliffe told Fox News. 'And what that intelligence shows, Maria, is that part of this was a Hillary Clinton plan, but part of it was an FBI plan to be an accelerant to that fake Steele dossier, to those fake Russia collusion claims by pouring oil on the fire, by amplifying the lie and burying the truth of what Hillary Clinton was up to.' Later in the interview, Ratcliffe said that he didn't think the statute of limitations would apply here, but he would leave to Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Justice Department to make a final determination. Now to be clear, that report on Hillary Clinton's involvement is still forthcoming. What you saw there was a teaser trailer of sorts. This all comes amidst a major push by Gabbard and the Trump administration to re-open the issue of Russiagate's origins. We now know that major claims in mainstream media about the extent of Russia's malfeasance and its connection to the Trump campaign were serially exaggerated at the behest of countless intelligence officials. Clinton, perhaps even more so than Obama, clearly bought into the idea that Russian activity cast down on Trump's win in 2016. She repeatedly called him an illegitimate president. In fact, even years later, in 2020, long after the ideological underpinnings of Russiagate had collapsed, Clinton was still making such claims on a podcast in 2020. 'The one thing that Trump is fearful of when it comes to his being president is that finally we will see how illegitimate his victory actually was and how he was involved in the seeking of foreign help and then the utilization of it,' she said. Clinton is, of course, entitled to continue being a sore loser about 2016, to shake her fist and say she really won that election. It's not true, but she can say it. But the American people deserve to know if fake and discredited intelligence about Russia, that smeared the Trump campaign, was pushed by her own team. If Ratcliffe has the goods, I for one look forward to seeing it. Robby Soave is co-host of The Hill's commentary show 'Rising' and a senior editor for Reason Magazine. This column is an edited transcription of his daily commentary. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Fox News
2 days ago
- Politics
- Fox News
Former Federal Prosecutor Reveals Whether Those Involved In Pushing The Russiagate Hoax Could Face Criminal Charges
During an appearance on Fox Across America With guest host Paul Mauro, former federal prosecutor Eric Seidel explains what it would take for people like Hillary Clinton and members of former President Obama's administration to be charged criminally over their alleged role in spreading the Trump-Russia collusion hoax. Katie Pavlich Reacts To The New Russiagate Hoax Revelations
The Independent
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
CIA director suggests Hillary Clinton could face criminal prosecution as part of Obama ‘Russiagate' investigation
CIA Director John Ratcliffe has continued to elevate conspiracies about former Obama-era officials using Russia to target Donald Trump, and suggested that some, including the president's 2016 White House rival Hillary Clinton, could face indictments or prosecutions. Speaking with Maria Bartiromo on Fox News, Ratcliffe expanded on the Trump administration's allegations that former president Barack Obama and some of his officials made up 'Russiagate' to undermine Trump in 2016. Clinton also served as Obama's secretary of state during his first term. 'This was a Hillary Clinton campaign scheme,' Ratcliffe said, alleging that Clinton conspired to 'falsely accuse' Trump of colluding with Russia in what would become known as the 'Steele Dossier'. Ratcliffe then claimed that Clinton, as well as former FBI director James Comey and Obama's former CIA director John Brennan, lied under oath about their apparent involvement in Russian election interference. 'So, what I think I hear you saying is, there is still an opportunity for indictments, potential prosecutions, accountability from those people who may have lied under oath like John Brennan, James Comey, and perhaps Hillary Clinton,' Bartiromo said to Ratcliffe. The CIA Director responded: 'Well, that's why I've made the referrals that I have.' Ratcliffe continued: '[Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard] has made referrals. And why we're going to continue to share the intelligence that would support the ability of our Department of Justice to make fair and just, bring fair and just claims, against those who have perpetrated this hoax against the American people and this stain on this country.' Clinton has not publicly commented on Ratcliffe's allegations. The Independent has asked a representative for Clinton for comment. Over the past few weeks, the Trump administration has embarked on a campaign against Obama and other officials, accusing them of unfairly targeting Trump in 2016 with 'Russiagate.' For years, Trump has railed against official findings that Russia interfered in the 2016 election by waging an online disinformation war to boost his campaign. He's blamed Democrats for fabricating the allegations and conclusion. Last week, Gabbard took the blame game to a new level and pointed to Obama as the figurehead behind 'Russiagate', accusing him of 'treasonous conspiracy'. Gabbard has made a criminal referral to the Justice Department regarding Obama. Last week, a spokesperson for Obama denied the 'bizarre allegations,' saying they were a 'ridiculous and weak attempt at distraction.' The return of 'Russiagate' and the fresh accusations appear to be a diversion tactic amid public uproar over the Trump administration's handling of the so-called 'Epstein Files'. On July 6, the Justice Department issued a memo saying that no further investigation was warranted into Jeffrey Epstein, a sex offender and wealthy financier accused of running a decades-long sex trafficking scheme involving girls and women. FBI and DOJ leadership had hinted for months that more information would be unearthed on Epstein. But the July 6 memo stated there was no 'client list' of high-profile individuals associated with Epstein, and confirmed that he died by suicide in federal prison in 2019. Trump's supporters, many of whom had long peddled Epstein conspiracy theories, have been in uproar since, amid claims of a coverup by the administration. The president has encouraged his supporters, and reporters, to move on. 'Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein? This guy's been talked about for years,' Trump said during a cabinet meeting in early July. 'Are people still talking about this guy? This creep? That is unbelievable.' In the weeks following the July 6 memo, the public spotlight has remained on Trump's former relationship with Epstein. The president previously said the two were friends for many years before having a falling out. The president has denied any involvement in Epstein's crimes. He has not been accused of any formal wrongdoing or charged with a crime. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that Trump had sent a birthday sketch to Epstein in the early 2000s, referencing 'secrets' and with the outline of a naked woman. Trump has denied sending the card and filed a $20bn defamation lawsuit against the Journal and its publisher. Last week, the Journal reported that former president Bill Clinton had also written Epstein a birthday card, which was contained in the same album. A spokesperson for Bill Clinton declined to comment on card but said the former president cut ties with Epstein years before he was arrested, and was aware of his crimes. In an apparent attempt to shift focus from the Epstein outrage, the Trump administration has launched its attack on senior Democrats. 'There is no doubt in my mind that the people we just talked about conspired,' Ratcliffe told Bartiromo Sunday, when asked about treason allegations related to Clinton. 'They conspired against President Trump, they conspired against the American people. So I'll leave it to Pam Bondi and our Department of Justice, Kash Patel and our FBI to investigate the conspiracy to do what and what charges they're capable of bringing,' Ratcliffe added.
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Hillary Clinton could be on the hook for perjury says Trump's CIA director as he vows to take action
Donald Trump's CIA Director John Ratcliffe suggested that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other top Obama aides could be hit with perjury charges. Ratcliffe said that Obama officials involved with the 'Russia hoax' - the debunked narrative that Russia interfered with the 2016 election on behalf of Donald Trump 's campaign - could be prosecuted. 'Are those statute of limitations still live?' Fox Business host Bartiromo asked Ratcliffe. 'Tell me if, in fact, we could see a criminal prosecution here.' Ratcliffe responded by saying that the intelligence community has another batch of documents that will be released soon showing elements of 'Russiagate' were part of a 'Hillary Clinton plan.' That evidence, he said, is contained in a document titled the 'Durham annex,' files authored during Special Counsel John Durham 's investigation into the origins of the Russia collusion scandal. 'And what that intelligence shows, Maria, is that part of this was a Hillary Clinton plan, but part of it was an FBI plan to be an accelerant to that fake Steele dossier, to those fake Russia collusion claims by pouring oil on the fire, by amplifying the lie and bearing the truth of what was - what Hillary Clinton was up to,' the CIA director said. The dossier, a 2016 opposition research file crafted by former MI6 spy Christoper Steele against then-candidate Trump, was a central - and largely debunked - component of the FBI's 'Russiagate' investigation. Ratcliffe also noted how Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey and former CIA Director John Brennan have all testified about the case within the last five years. The statute for limitations for lying to Congress and the Department of Justice is five years, meaning the former officials could still be hit with charges. 'Much of that testimony is, frankly, completely inconsistent with what our underlying intelligence that is about to be declassified in the Durham annex, what that reflects,' Ratcliffe said. If the officials' testimony does not align with their past comments under oath they could be hit with perjury charges. 'They conspired against President Trump, they conspired against the American people,' the CIA director said. 'So, I'll leave it to Pam Bondi and our DOJ and Kash Patel and our FBI to investigate the conspiracy to do what, and what charges that they're capable of bringing.' A spokesperson for Clinton did not immediately respond to the Daily Mail's request for comment. However, some critics have slammed Ratcliffe for not releasing 'Russiagate' documents when he served as director of national intelligence during Trump's first term. 'Can anyone explain why John Ratcliffe, who held the same position as Tulsi (DNI) under Trump, totally failed to identify the Russian collusion coup hoax against Trump and was then promoted by Trump to head the CIA,' podcast host Clint Russell wrote on X. Last week, DNI Tulsi Gabbard declassified documents that she claims show how Obama-era intelligence officials 'manufactured and politicized intelligence to lay the groundwork.' She released a September 2020 report by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on Russia's attempts to influence the 2016 presidential election. Donald Trump has long blamed former Obama officials for cooking up the infamous 'Russia hoax' against him The file disputes the claim that Russia interfered with Trump's first election on behalf of the Republican. Gabbard has said that she now has 'the evidence' to prosecute Obama officials. She also said she would be referring the evidence to the Department of Justice. Hillary and Bill Clinton were also the topic of discussion on Capitol Hill last week after lawmakers voted to subpoena the couple over their ties to late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. A motion from Rep. Scott Perry to have Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., solicit the former first couple's testimony passed last Wednesday. The effort also called for other high-profile Democrats with expected ties to the late pedophile to be subpoenaed. Former Attorneys General Eric Holder and Merrick Garland will also be compelled to testify. So will former special counsel Robert Mueller, who oversaw Trump's Russia collusion case. Perry's full wish list includes: William Jefferson Clinton, Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton, James Brian Comey, Loretta Elizabeth Lynch, Eric Hampton Holder, Jr., Merrick Brian Garland, Robert Swan Mueller III, William Pelham Barr, Jefferson Beauregard Sessions the third, and Alberto Gonzales.
