Wall Street-Owned GOP Threatening To Take Obamas Retirement Money Because Of $400K Speech

[babylonsister]

http://www.politicususa.com/2017/05/03/wall-street-owned-gop-threatening-obamas-pension-400k-speech.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook


Wall Street-Owned GOP Threatening To Take Obama’s Retirement Money Because Of $400K Speech

By Sean Colarossi on Wed, May 3rd, 2017 at 9:34 pm
Even when Barack Obama isn't in the White House, Republicans in Congress are trying to bring him down.


Republicans, whose economic agenda is basically written by and for Wall Street, are now threatening to go after former President Obama’s pension after it was revealed that the former president will accept money for a speech he’s delivering to … Wall Street.

According to USA TODAY, GOP Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah – in response to Obama’s planned $400,000 speech to Wall Street – will reintroduce legislation to curb pensions of former presidents.

More from USA TODAY:

Last year, then-president Barack Obama vetoed a bill that would have curbed the pensions of former presidents if they took outside income of $400,000 or more.


So now that former president Barack Obama has decided to accept $400,000 for an upcoming Wall Street speech, the sponsors of that bill say they’ll reintroduce that bill in hopes that President Trump will sign it.

“The Obama hypocrisy on this issue is revealing,” said Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and sponsor of the 2016 bill. “His veto was very self-serving.”

Chaffetz and Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, the sponsor of the companion Senate bill, say they will re-introduce the Presidential Allowance Modernization Act this month.

Like just about every other president in modern history, Obama plans to give paid speeches after he’s out of office. His upcoming speech to Wall Street likely won’t be the last in what will probably be a long list of post-presidency speeches to various organizations.

Why do Republicans suddenly feel that presidents should now be punished for delivering paid speeches just because it’s Obama who’s doing it?

I’ll leave that to others to speculate on.

Ultimately, one thing is clear: Even when Barack Obama isn’t in the White House, Republicans in Congress are trying to bring him down.

Once again, they’ll likely fail.

[Doreen]

1. They would fucking allow trump to do it.

or any other repuke.

[KingCharlemagne]

15. Or any white person. - nt

[Doreen]

18. Do not forget male and far far far right Christian fundamentalist.

[PA Democrat]

2. George W. Bush made $15 million. Is Chaffetz going after HIM???????

[JI7]

22. is GWBush Black ?

[R B Garr]

3. This is what you get for gift-wrapping smears

against Democrats. This is nothing more than a way to prolong the divisive rhetoric that obviously -- obviously-- helps Republicans. Never again!

[msongs]

4. good thing no democrats or independents have criticized obama for giving paid speeches. nt

[LenaBaby61]

10. "Good thing no democrats or independents have criticized obama for giving paid speeches."

So true

[pnwmom]

5. And unfortunately certain progressives have already given the GOP political cover for doing so. n/t

[R B Garr]

8. Yeah, that's exactly why Chaffetz is picking up

Last edited Thu May 4, 2017, 12:05 AM - Edit history (1)

where 2016 left off. It's a gift horse to Republicans.

[Ccarmona]

6. Hypocrites..so Much for the Free Market

They claim to love dearly.
Hell, even If Larry the Cable Guy spoke to Wall St, his fee would be the same. That's what he earns for any show he puts on.

[0rganism]

7. bill of attainder?

this seems to be treading dangerously close to the line...

[KingCharlemagne]

16. Great minds think alike. I was tginking about the ex post facto

qualities of this proposal too.

[ProudLib72]

9. ChappedAzz, go get your surgery already!

I hope there is no anesthesiologist who agrees to sedate him while they tear apart his fucking foot!

[oasis]

13. Did Dr. Conrad Murray get his license back yet?

[Ohioblue22]

11. oh but they're just the same omg lol

[gratuitous]

12. I don't recall this same outrage when Reagan took a $2 million speaking fee in 1989

I wonder, wonder, wha-aa-aa-aa-at the difference could possibly be? Unless the difference is black and white, I don't think the difference is quite so discernible between Obama and Reagan.

[ProudLib72]

17. The difference was knowledge of monetary acceptance

At that point, they could have paid Reagan in chewing gum and he would not have known the difference.

[GulfCoast66]

14. Clearly unconstitutional, and they know it

But designed to up the republicans base and certain others who supposedly hate republicans.

[unblock]

19. How is it unconstitutional?

Nakedly partisan, sure.
Petty vengeance, sure.

But unconstitutional?

Former presidents have no constitutional right to a pension, that's always been subject to federal law.

They could reduce it to zero if they passed a law for that.

As long as they make shrub and other former presidents subject to the same rules, I don't see a constitutional problem.

[GulfCoast66]

20. Bill of attainer

Congress cannot fine individual or in other ways strip them of property. Pensions are property earned.

And we all know this is for show. They have no intention of doing it and in my opinion had not some well meaning and some not so well meaning liberals made a deal of it they would not have brought it up.

[unblock]

21. i agree if it affected obama alone it would be unconstitutional

but as long as they treated all former presidents equally, i still think it would be constitutional.

it doesn't make sense that they can enact a law to specifically pay a tiny number of individuals (former presidents) and not at some point lower the amount or even repeal the act entirely.

notwithstanding that we call it a "pension", i think the amount is discretionary, subject to federal law.


i agree that it's red meat for the republican masses, and if it even passed congress, donnie would probably veto it, as obama did.
it's chump change for donnie, but he's a greedy f---, i can't see him letting any amount of money getting away from him.