More Disturbing News about Sec. Clinton

I have a news item to share concerning Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, but if I may have your patience, I’ll save it for the end of this post. First, I wish to discuss  Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump.

In my return from DC a couple of weeks ago, I took a cab to the airport. The driver, an immigrant from Uganda, was quite talkative, and is passionate about politics. He even “tested” me on my knowledge, with questions like “Which president signed into law the repeal of Glass-Stegall?”, and was delighted when I gave him the correct answers. 🙂

He’s a Bernie supporter, and he went on at length about what he views as the corruption of Hillary Clinton. Typical rant: “How does she expect us to believe that her taking $600,000 for a speech on Wall Street wouldn’t affect what she would do as president? Does she really take us for fools?”

Of course, as a black man, he had equal contempt for black “leaders” who are supporting Clinton. I must say I can’t blame him. What has Clinton done proactively that is specifically aimed at improving the lot of African-Americans? Nothing, as far as I know. I am not aware of anything Bernie Sanders has done in the Senate specifically on the black issue either, but he has a lifetime of working to support the poor and the working class, and that should qualify. And, in case it matters, as a college student, Sanders was active in the civil rights movement — whereas Hillary, at that age, was a Republican. If African-Americans want to judge a candidate purely on race — which I think is too narrow, but “just if” — then the exhortations of the black leaders to vote for Hillary makes no sense, and one must wonder about their judgment processes.

What will surprise, even revulse, those of you readers who are in the press or the “establishment” political world — but will make perfect sense to those of you outside of those realms — is that the above-mentioned cabbie also likes Donald Trump. It’s a  great example of the validity of the comments of Senator Jeff Sessions to Breitbart, among which was “…It looks like working people who may have been voting for Democrats voted for Trump in huge numbers.”

Now, what about Clinton and work visas? Some of you know that she has a terrible record in this area, overtly supporting the “Infosyses.” But the latest revelation from the Daily Kos is still mind boggling. According to the article, Clinton received $225,000 for a speech before a most unlikely audience, the American Camp Association. Remarkably, this was 10% of the organization’s annual budget; what did they want from Clinton? The answer turns out to be that their member camps hire young foreign workers as summer counselors, under the J-1 visa. Amazing.

23 thoughts on “More Disturbing News about Sec. Clinton

  1. While I hate the H-1B, the J-1 is absolutely appalling. It takes 300,000-500,000 jobs from American kids and gives them to foreign “students”, many of whom are just ordinary workers. There is a massive infrastructure around the J-1, which gets fees from visa users, fees from companies, and brings in these “students” to work in terrible conditions. For the employers, they are able to evade thousands of dollars in taxes, making the visa a vehicle to evade the minimum wage. It is used to bring in grocery clerks in Publix supermarkets in Florida, life guards in NJ, camp counselors in MI, waiters in SD, and a host of other jobs that Americans would be happy to do. That chinese serving you ice cream in Mt Rushmore National Monument is hired by Xanterra, the concessioner for the Park Service, and is hired instead of hiring the many thousands of Indians who live within 100 miles of Mt. Rushmore and who would be happy to work there. It’s a horrible horrible visa, and is terrible for American workers.


  2. Remember that summer visa hiring is a HUGE business (and often a scam) in which foreign students are offered a chance to come to the U.S. and get a “summer job” at “good wages”. What they often get is a shakedown in which they work for peanuts, have to stay at some company flop-house, and then get charged off their pay for rent, work clothes, food, medical care, etc. I’ve read of cases where students saved money to travel to the U.S. on this kind of summer-work visa, and went home with less money than when they arrived!

    Of course the motivation is to avoid having to hire U.S. workers at U.S. wages — especially since abused U.S. workers won’t be having to return overseas — and thus would be able to sue and wait for the court system to grind out a bit of punishment (hopefully). A foreign kid has no idea how the U.S. legal system works, and after travelling back to their home country, would be out of touch and unable to follow up.

    Note that the idea of hiring young foreigners instead of young Americans has also become very popular since the U.S. Au Pair program was officially started in 1989. For some reason, wealthy elites would rather have their children raised by a young foreign girl, instead of a young America girl. I suspect it’s not just about money, but also a rejection of U.S. middle-class culture.

    BTW, the J-1 summer visa shakedown has another thing in common with “au pair” — the French term literally means “on par” — you don’t make any money, but you didn’t have to pay out of pocket for room & board. Some “summer job,” eh?


  3. For Bernie Sanders, I do not believe American people will vote for a self-described socialist to be the president. Neither will they allow US to become an enlarged version of Denmark or Norway.

    As far as Trump is concerned, do you really believe Trump will do what he say he will do on campaign trails if he indeed becomes the president? I do not believe because he himself is a corrupted capitalist billionaire.

    And by the way, if you do watch Bernie sanders’s rally and Donald Trump’s rally, whenever either mentions the other’s name, the audience will boo. So there may be some people who support both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, I highly doubt that is in an overwhelmingly large proportion


    • In my mind, each of the candidates has a probability of doing what they say, and the probabilities in the case of Trump and Sanders are far above the rest.

      Sanders calls himself a “democratic socialist,” by which he means the philosophy of Western Europe, where there is more government intervention in the economy than we have here in the U.S, but certainly NOT anything remotely like China, for instance. Somewhat surprisingly to me, that hasn’t been an issue in the campaign so far, but we really don’t know.

      People who show up to political rallies are not representative of voters as a whole, and people who boo at political rallies are not representative of the attendees.


      • As I said before, I do not believe US citizens will like some enlarged version of Denmark or Norway to which the term “democratic socialism” is applied and I do not think most people will have the insight as you have to probe into differences among “democratic socialism” vs “socialism” vs “communism”.

        I guess your reason behind “the probabilities in the case of Trump and Sanders are far above the rest.” is that Sanders does not have wealthy donors to control him and Trump is self-funding himself.

        For Sanders, maybe that is true but even if he will do what he said he would do, do you really believe his idea is practical? All republicans will block him and moderate democrats will also block him. Not to mention his chance is increasingly slim.

        For Trump, how many times has he changed his positions and flip-flopped?
        If you do watch republican debates, in the second or third debate, moderator asked Trump about his criticism about Marco Rubio being “Zuckerberg’s personal senator” regarding the H1b issue. And Trump responded by denying the criticism even if his own immigration plan contains the same line.

        So based on what do you trust Trump?


        • Most Americans know very little about Denmark and Norway. But most regard Germany as the economic powerhouse of Europe.

          Your assessment that Sanders’ chances are “increasingly slim” is superficial. The fact that he won the Latino vote in Nevada, something Clinton should have had a lock on, is quite remarkable.

          Trump is impetuous. We all know that. He speaks impetuously, sometimes with the result that he is inconsistent. I don’t think that’s good, but yes, I do trust him.


          • Trump has many flaws. His strength is that he is a first-rate judge of character, and is quite willing to act on that judgement. In that way, he might make a good president. It may surprise some, but the President does very little. He picks others and they do stuff. So, selecting the right team is the key skill. Trump seems to have that skill.


          • You still did not tell me why you trust him to do the right thing.

            I read Trump’s book “art of the deal”. To me, all those things he described in that book were very typical measures of propaganda that manipulate media and public emotions and those dirty tricks in a capitalistic economy which are quite dangerous if used for wrong purposes.

            And if you trust him to build a wall and make mexico pay for it, trust him to deport all 11 million people out of the country and trust him to ban all Muslims into the country, it is really a pity.

            Regarding Sanders’s chance, I assess based on the current fact. You probably assume Bernie Sanders won latino vote based on results from exit and entrance polls. However, there are already reports questioning these results.


          • I’m sorry, but trust is an intangible, so I can’t explain it concretely, much less convince you.

            I oppose building another wall on the Mexican border.

            Speaking of trust, I have strongly distrusted the Washington Post ever since Bill Gates’ wife was on their board, at which time they became horribly biased on H-1B issues. Of course, the fact that the cited poll was cosponsored by Univision makes it pretty useless.

            Having said that, though, I don’t take much issue with the article’s point that there is not just one group of Latinos. The Cubans in FL will prefer Clinton to Sanders, I’m sure. My only point was that the Nevada Latinos tend to be poor, working class, and it was very gratifying to me that they chose Sanders over Clinton. It suggests that Sanders has a real chance with the African-Americans, once they get to hear more about him.

            So far Sanders has one win and two ties with Clinton. Hard to see why you say Sanders’ chances are “increasingly slim.”

            The polls can be misleading, but they show Sanders as having a much better chance than Clinton to beat Trump in the general election. But if Clinton gets the nomination, you had better prepare yourself psychologically for our next president, Donald Trump.


          • By the way, if you think Germany is a good model for America, I suggest you check how Germany designs their immigration policy regarding foreign students. As you support abolishing OPT and think foreign students bring damage to citizens, you will not like it.


          • Hmm…I don’t recall saying that I like the German immigration model. Please be more careful. I simply said that most Americans would be less concerned about Sanders’ “democratic socialism” if they knew he was referring to that kind of model.


      • Are you essentially saying you trust Donald Trump to do the right thing because you just “feel” in that way?

        If people like you are enchanted by the Trump spell, I can now understand why he may really get the nomination of GOP.

        Is it naive of me to think Trump will fade because of his rough time in the most recent Republican debate?

        Liked by 1 person

        • Of course trust is a feeling. Are you a robot? 🙂

          I don’t know about the debate. I only watched a little bit of it. And anything is possible this year. But no, I don’t think Trump will fade, not at all.


  4. >Clinton received $225,000 for a speech before a most unlikely audience,
    >the American Camp Association. Remarkably, this was 10% of the
    >organization’s annual budget; what did they want from Clinton?
    >The answer turns out to be that their member camps hire young
    >foreign workers as summer counselors, under the J-1 visa.

    Compared to what is already known about Hillary, this is minor.


  5. I wonder if Hillary is an “opportunist” politician who may not be not trusted by Labor Unions due to her inconsistent support for US Labor. Leaders of the major Labor Unions have not yet made any endorsements for either Hillary or Bernie in the Democratic Party Presidential Primaries as far as I am aware.

    IMHO, here is further proof in a 2007 LA Times news article reprinted below that Hillary Clinton is no friend of US Labor Union and favors free trade deals and assistance that harm American workers. As a US Senator, Hillary Clinton supposedly tried to help Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) relocate their US Headquarters to New York State in 2003. TCS has not been good to its employees and contractors in the past…

    TCS chose to settle a class-action lawsuit out-of-court before a Federal District Court trial with former employees who alleged TCS committed tax fraud and theft against its past or current employees. TCS employee staff sued TCS for alleged discriminatory hiring practices that supposedly gave illegal hiring preferences to foreign workers over US citizens. TCS allegedly gave illegal hiring preferences to job applicants who could understand a specific foreign language dialect and English language over other “English only” job applicants for administrative tasks unrelated to the job responsibilities. The US Department of Labor eventually fined TCS for requiring TCS contractors and employees in the USA to use a Tata company online “time-and-attendance” software system with a software user interface written only in an Indian foreign language dialect that is very difficult for English-only workers to use or understand. These lawsuit issues and others that affected TCS employees and job applicants are well-documented in IT trade magazines and the news media, but I remain surprised Hillary Clinton seems to support companies such as Infosys and TCS that allegedly discriminated against workers.

    I tried to find another 2003 New York state newspaper’s news article that reported US Sen. Hillary Clinton held a last-minute press conference in NY State announcing Tata Consultancy Services plans to move their US Headquarters with Operations staff to New York State. If I recall correctly, the announcement said a TCS tax agreement with New York State would “create/move” 1,000 jobs over a 3 year period to New York state and as a result, TCS would be eligible for millions of Dollars of State and Federal government tax breaks and abatements. Sen. Clinton has never explained in public what she actually did to attract Tata Consultancy Services to move their US Headquarters to New York State as a US Senator, but she seemed to want the free media publicity from the news conference.

    However, there were later problems for TCS and Senator Clinton after 2003… TCS reportedly only created 25 jobs (not 1,000 as announced earlier) in New York State, did not move its USA corporate HQ to New York State, and should not have received any public tax incentives for tax contract non-compliance. I do not recall whether TCS tried to obtain tax incentive benefits that were unearned according to its tax incentives contract with New York State…

    Regards, Questor

    Clinton’s free-trade advocacy is hitting labor where it lives

    Competition helps both sides, she says. A Buffalo deal yielded a few jobs.

    July 30, 2007

    Peter Wallsten

    LA Times Staff Writer

    BUFFALO, N.Y. — To many labor unions and high-tech workers, the Indian giant Tata

    Consultancy Services is a serious threat — a company that has helped move U.S. jobs to

    India while sending thousands of foreign workers on temporary visas to the United States.

    So when Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) came to this struggling city [in 2003] to

    announce some good news, her choice of partners was something of a surprise.

    Joining Tata Consultancy’s chief executive at a downtown hotel, Clinton announced that the

    company would open a software development office in Buffalo and form a research partnership

    with a local university. Tata told a newspaper that it might hire as many as 200 people.

    The 2003 announcement had clear benefits for the senator and the company: Tata received

    good press, and Clinton burnished her credentials as a champion for New York’s depressed

    upstate region.


  6. The Clintons have a history of involvement with Indian companies like Tata. The Clinton Foundation has received contributions from Tata, among many others. Hillary’s indignant argument that money doesn’t buy influence is laughable, given the speaking fee from the Camp Association. The shocker here is that the connection is so blatant and obvious. It looks like Hillary is getting a payoff for her pro-work visa stance. And given the speaking fee is such a large percentage of the company’s total budget, they must really feel they got their money’s worth.


    • You do know that many co.’s are already going the L-1 route to bring in workers ?
      For co.’s like Tata easy to do, because they are located in the US as well as in India.
      Added benefits: the L-2 wife is eligible for an EAD, and an L-1A visa holder can usually apply for a Green Card in the EB-1 cat. (shortest wait).


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s