The Kevin Trudeau Show: 4-27-13
Today, Kevin reveals exactly how he would fix America if he were elected to office. Find out which programs he would cut, what he would make legal and illegal, what he would expose, and what laws he would demand!
Self Help:
Give Kevin Your Vote of Support!
Don’t Worry About The How
Everything Kevin:
Become An Insider!
Support Kevin!
Kevin is on YouTube!
Sign Up For Kevin’s FREE Podcast
Follow Kevin on Twitter
Become A Fan of Kevin on Facebook
Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
Click below to watch the Kevin Trudeau Show!
Ron Paul Vs. Barack Obama Election Would Be Tight Race
January 31, 2012 by admin
Filed under News Stories
January 31, 2012
Digital Journal
By: Andrew Moran
Lake Jackson – Who says Texas Republican Congressman Ron Paul is unelectable? In a hypothetical matchup, a new survey suggests that the libertarian-leaning representative is in a statistical tie with President Barack Obama.
The latest polls show that three-time presidential candidate Ron Paul will not win the state of Florida. Although Dr. Paul is hardly campaigning in the state, he is generally polling in double digits and is fighting for the third spot with former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum.
A new article from the Christian Science Monitor pondered the likelihood that Paul could garner more delegates than former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Santorum this week because he has focused his campaign in Maine and Nevada, which have their caucuses on Saturday.
A poll released Monday may give him momentum ahead of the caucuses in February.
According to the latest USA Today/Gallup poll, in a hypothetical matchup between the Texas congressman and President Barack Obama, it would be too close to call. In the general election among national registered voters, Paul would garner 46 percent of the vote, while the incumbent president would have 49 percent.
However, the gap widens when the poll reflects swing-state registered voters in which the president gains 50 percent of the vote compared to Paul’s 43 percent.
Click here for the full report from Digital Journal
The Kevin Trudeau Show: 8-6-11
Today, Kevin reveals the facts behind insider trading in Washington and how much your “representatives” are REALLY worth! Plus, the creator of the Resolve mineral detox, Dr. Ray Lala, stops by to explain how his mineral detox can virtually cure you from any viral infection, including herpes and HPV.
Self Help:
Second Stream Of Income
The Secret To Perfect Health
Resolve The “Unresolvable”
Protect Your Brain
Cleanse The Toxins From Your Body
Eliminate Fluoride Consumption
Health:
What’s In Your Milk?
Cellphones, Cancer and Infertility
The Silent Enemy More Dangerous Than Cigarettes
Fluoride Consumption Leads To Brain Damage
Autism Linked To Prozac
Government:
WH Staffer Calls Fox News’ Bret Baier A ‘Lunatic’
Congressional Trading on Advance Info Not Illegal
Congressional Staffers Gain From Trading in Stocks
Congress Mulls Trading Curbs for Its Own
Education:
How Cursive Writing Affects Brain Development
Indiana Latest State To Drop Handwriting Requirement
Everything Kevin:
Become An Insider!
Stand with KT!
Kevin is on YouTube!
Sign Up For Kevin’s FREE Podcast
Follow Kevin on Twitter
Become A Fan of Kevin on Facebook
Kevin’s Film Club
Kevin’s Book Club
Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
Click below to watch the Kevin Trudeau Show!
Congressional Trading on Advance Info Not Illegal: SEC
July 15, 2011 by admin
Filed under News Stories
July 15th, 2011
CNBC.com
By: Eamon Javers
When you buy and sell stocks based on secrets you learned at the office, it could be insider trading.
But when a United States Senator does it, it’s probably perfectly legal.
That’s because the SEC has largely determined that trading stocks based on advance knowledge of action in Congress is not insider trading.
If anything, it’s “outsider” trading — buying and selling shares based on knowledge of an outside force that’s about to hit a company’s share value.
Think of it like a trader who sees a satellite image of a hurricane bearing down on an oil rig — and shorts the oil company’s stock in expectation of the damage.
Except in the case of Capitol Hill, the members of Congress can be both the trader and the hurricane — buying and selling shares in expectation of the effect that their own action has on the company’s stock price.
Some critics say that’s probably going on a lot on Capitol Hill — although they don’t have any direct proof.
“It’s really quite outrageous,” said Craig Holman, the legislative representative for Public Citizen. “If you just take a look at the statistics, members of Congress are either geniuses when it comes to stock trading or they are in fact trading off of some of this insider information.”
A pair of recent academic studies found that House members beat the market in their personal stock trading by about 6 percent, and Senators beat the market by about 10 percent.
In the 2011 study “Abnormal Returns From the Common Stock Investments of Members of the U.S. House of Representatives,” four university professors found that a portfolio that mimics the purchases of House Members beats the market by 55 basis points per month, or approximately 6 percent annually. That study looked at 16,000 common stock transactions made by approximately 300 House delegates from 1985 to 2001.
“Overall we find that the common stocks purchased by Members of the U.S. House of Representatives earn statistically significant positive abnormal returns. Our results indicate that Representatives, like Senators, also trade with a substantial information advantage,” wrote the study’s authors, Alan J. Ziobrowski of Georgia State University, James W. Boyd, of Lindenwood University, Ping Cheng of Florida Atlantic University and Brigitte J. Ziobrowski of Augusta State University.
The group also noted that stocks purchased by Democrats outperform stocks purchased by Republicans.
The SEC generally does not view trading on the basis of advance knowledge of Congressional action to be insider trading. Both House and Senate ethics manuals say that members of Congress are not supposed to make any personal profit from confidential knowledge, although no member of Congress has ever been publicly sanctioned for such trading.
Critics of the loose rules say they can’t prove that members of Congress or their staffs are actually trading and profiting from their positions, but they still believe that’s the only explanation for the returns members of Congress generate over time.
“It just boggles the imagination to think that members of Congress are so much smarter than we are and other traders that they just for some reason enjoy a much higher rate of return on their stock investments than the rest of us,” said Holman. “I just don’t believe that.”
And once again this year, two Democrats have introduced legislation called the STOCK Act — or Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act — that would prohibit such political speculation.
Under the measure, sponsored by Reps Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., and Tim Walz, D-Minn., members of Congress, their staffs, and others in Washington would face a new set of legal prohibitions.
The proposal:
- Prohibits Members and employees of Congress from buying or selling securities, swaps, security based swaps, or commodity futures based on nonpublic information they obtain because of their status;
- Prohibits Executive Branch employees from buying or selling securities, swaps, security based swaps, or commodity futures based on nonpublic information they obtain because of their status;
- Prohibits those outside Congress from buying or selling securities, swaps, security based swaps, or commodity futures based on nonpublic information obtained from within Congress or the Executive Branch;
- Prohibits Members and employees of Congress from disclosing any non-public information about any pending or prospective legislative action for investment purposes;
Click here for the full report from CNBC.com
U.S. Senator Wants to Probe Murdoch for Possible US Phone-Hacking
July 13, 2011 by admin
Filed under News Stories
July 13th, 2011
International Business Times
A powerful American Senator wants to investigate Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. to determine if the phone-hacking scandal has stretched across the water from Britain to the U.S.
The Daily Telegraph of the UK reported that Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), a Senate committee chairman, has”serious questions” regarding whether or not News Corp “has broken United States law”.
The Senator’s demand for a probe could potentially have extremely dramatic repercussions on Murdoch’s media empire and legal liabilities.
Rockefeller, who is chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee and great-grandson of the 19th century tycoon John D. Rockefeller, said in a statement: “The reported hacking by News Corporation newspapers against a range of individuals – including children – is offensive and a serious breach of journalistic ethics. This raises serious questions about whether the company has broken US law, and I encourage the appropriate agencies to investigate to ensure that Americans have not had their privacy violated.”
Rockefeller added: “I am concerned that the admitted phone hacking in London by the News Corp. may have extended to 9/11 victims or other Americans. If they did, the consequences will be severe.”
The Senate and House of Representatives has already been asked to investigate if News Corp. has been hacking the voice-mail messages of American citizens, raising the specter of Murdoch and his company having violated US laws.
Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), told reporters: “It’s hard to imagine that the same things [phone-hacking] have not been happening in the United States. Republicans are very tied to Murdoch but not at the expense of constituencies of Americans such as terror victims and soldiers.”
Kevin Zeese, a lawyer acting for the group ProtectOurElections.org, told reporters: “Rupert Murdoch moved to the US and became an American citizen in 1985 in order to take advantage of our laws.”
Apparently US Congress is watching for developments in Britain before considering taking any action on this side of the Atlantic against Murdoch.
“We’re keeping an eye on the situation, but are not planning on looking into it at this time,” said Jodi Seth, press secretary of Senator John Kerry, chairman of the Senate sub-committee on communications.
“For now, all that is certain is that there was hacking in Britain, which is outside of our jurisdiction.”
The chief executive officer of Dow Jones, a News Corp. subsidiary, is none other than Les Hinton, a former executive of News International, the UK subsidiary that owned the now-defunct News of the World newspaper (which was at the center of the scandal when it broke). Robert Thomson, the Wall Street Journal editor, was also part of News International.
Click here for the full report from International Business Times
The Kevin Trudeau Show: 3-30-11
Today, Kevin reveals exactly how he would fix America if he were elected to office. Find out which programs he would cut, what he would make legal and illegal, what he would expose, and what laws he would demand!
Self Help:
Give Kevin Your Vote of Support!
Don’t Worry About The How
Everything Kevin:
Become An Insider!
Support Kevin!
Kevin is on YouTube!
Sign Up For Kevin’s FREE Podcast
Follow Kevin on Twitter
Become A Fan of Kevin on Facebook
Kevin’s Film Club
Kevin’s Book Club
Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
Click below to watch the Kevin Trudeau Show!
Wisconsin Republican Lives Outside District With Mistress
March 14, 2011 by admin
Filed under News Stories
March 14th, 2011
The Raw Story
By: David Ferguson
Protesters who marched at the home of Wisconsin state senator Randy Hopper (R-Fond du Lac) were met with something of a surprise on Saturday. Mrs. Hopper appeared at the door and informed them that Sen. Hopper was no longer in residence at this address, but now lives in Madison, WI with his 25-year-old mistress.
Blogging Blue reports that the conservative Republican’s much-younger new flame is currently employed as a lobbyist for right-wing advocacy group Persuasion Partners, Inc., but was previously a state senate staffer who worked on the Senate Economic Development Committee alongside Mr. Hopper. Her bio has been scrubbed from the Persuasion Partners’ website, but a screen-grab is available here.
Sen. Hopper has worked closely with Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker to implement the state’s new anti-labor laws and enact policies favorable to the interests of big business. Like Walker, Hopper is one of the Republican politiciansnamed in a massive recall effort spearheaded by Wisconsin Democrats.
According to Wisconsin law, state elected officials who have served at least one year of their current term are eligible for recall by voters. Hopper was elected state senator for district 18 in the fall of 2008, making him eligible for recall, whereas Governor Walker will not be eligible until 2012.
Blogging Blue also reports that Mrs. Hopper intends to sign the recall petition against her husband. The petition has already been signed by the family’s maid.
Click here for the full report from Raw Story
U.S. Senator Caught Admitting That Lame Duck Session is Rigged
December 2, 2010 by admin
Filed under News Stories
December 2nd, 2010
Natural News
By: Jonathan Benson
The recent passage of Senate Bill 510, the so-called “Food Safety Modernization Act” took place during the Senate’s “lame duck” session — the time after the fall elections, but before the new members of Congress have been installed, where Congress reconvenes to discuss various business matters and pending legislation. And Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO) was recently caught on tape admitting that the lame duck session is rigged, and that the Congress has no idea what will be discussed prior to having it brought before them.
Since many of the Congressmen participating in the lame duck session have already been voted out — but have yet to be replaced by their successors — interesting things often happen because they can essentially vote however they want without repercussions. They also apparently rig the sessions in order to advance various agendas.
“There’s nothing about — because it’s all rigged,” Bennet was recorded as saying. “I mean, the whole conversation is rigged. The fact that we don’t get to a discussion before the break about what we’re going to do in the lame duck — is just rigged. This stuff’s rigged.”
Of course, Bennet had no idea that he was in front of a live microphone when he said this. And once he realized it, he quickly shut it off. But interestingly enough, the comments came during the proceedings about S. 510, the controversial “food safety” bill that was just passed by the lame duck Senate. And the statements give credence to widely-held notions that Congressional hearings are not conducted properly or fairly, and that there is likely much foul play occurring throughout the entire process.
Bennet later attempted to whitewash his statements by generalizing them into nothing more than “disappoint[ment] in partisan politics and political games that prevent progress.” Unfortunately for him, though, the cat is already out of the bag.
Click here for the full report from Natural News
TSA Pat-Down Leaves Traveler Covered in Urine
November 22, 2010 by admin
Filed under News Stories
November 22nd, 2010
MSNBC.com
By: Harriet Baskas
A retired special education teacher on his way to a wedding in Orlando, Fla., said he was left humiliated, crying and covered with his own urine after an enhanced pat-down by TSA officers recently at Detroit Metropolitan Airport.
“I was absolutely humiliated, I couldn’t even speak,” said Thomas D. “Tom” Sawyer, 61, of Lansing, Mich.
Sawyer is a bladder cancer survivor who now wears a urostomy bag, which collects his urine from a stoma, or opening in his abdomen. “I have to wear special clothes and in order to mount the bag I have to seal a wafer to my stomach and then attach the bag. If the seal is broken, urine can leak all over my body and clothes.”
On Nov. 7, Sawyer said he went through the security scanner at Detroit Metropolitan Airport. “Evidently the scanner picked up on my urostomy bag, because I was chosen for a pat-down procedure.”
Due to his medical condition, Sawyer asked to be screened in private. “One officer looked at another, rolled his eyes and said that they really didn’t have any place to take me,” said Sawyer. “After I said again that I’d like privacy, they took me to an office.”
Sawyer wears pants two sizes too large in order to accommodate the medical equipment he wears. He’d taken off his belt to go through the scanner and once in the office with security personnel, his pants fell down around his ankles. “I had to ask twice if it was OK to pull up my shorts,” said Sawyer, “And every time I tried to tell them about my medical condition, they said they didn’t need to know about that.”
Before starting the enhanced pat-down procedure, a security officer did tell him what they were going to do and how they were going to it, but Sawyer said it wasn’t until they asked him to remove his sweatshirt and saw his urostomy bag that they asked any questions about his medical condition.
“One agent watched as the other used his flat hand to go slowly down my chest. I tried to warn him that he would hit the bag and break the seal on my bag, but he ignored me. Sure enough, the seal was broken and urine started dribbling down my shirt and my leg and into my pants.”
The security officer finished the pat-down, tested the gloves for any trace of explosives and then, Sawyer said, “He told me I could go. They never apologized. They never offered to help. They acted like they hadn’t seen what happened. But I know they saw it because I had a wet mark.”
Humiliated, upset and wet, Sawyer said he had to walk through the airport soaked in urine, board his plane and wait until after takeoff before he could clean up.
“I am totally appalled by the fact that agents that are performing these pat-downs have so little concern for people with medical conditions,” said Sawyer.
Sawyer completed his trip and had no problems with the security procedures at the Orlando International Airport on his journey back home. He said he plans to file a formal complaint with the TSA.
When he does, said TSA spokesperson Dwayne Baird, “We will review the matter and take appropriate action if necessary.” In the meantime, Baird encourages anyone with a medical condition to read the TSA’s website section on assistive devices and mobility aids.
The website says that travelers with disabilities and medical conditions have “the option of requesting a private screening” and that security officers “will not ask nor require you to remove your prosthetic device, cast, or support brace.”
Sawyer said he’s written to his senators, state representatives and the president of the United States. He’s also shared details of the incident online with members of the nonprofit Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network, many of whom have offered support and shared their travel experiences.
“I am a good American and I want safety for all passengers as much as the next person,” Sawyer said. “But if this country is going to sacrifice treating people like human beings in the name of safety, then we have already lost the war.”
Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network executive director Claire Saxton said that there are hundreds of thousands of people living with ostomies in the United States. “TSA agents need to be trained to listen when someone tells them have a health issue and trained in knowing what an ostomy is. No one living with an ostomy should be afraid of flying because they’re afraid of being humiliated at the checkpoint.”
Eric Lipp, executive director of Open Doors Association, which works with businesses and the disability community, called what happened to Sawyer “unfortunate.”
“But enhanced pat-downs are not a new issue for people with disabilities who travel,” Lipp said. “They’ve always had trouble getting through the security checkpoint.”
Still, Lipp said the TSA knows there’s a problem. “This came up during a recent meeting of the agency’s disability advisory board and I expect to see a procedure coming in place shortly that will directly address the pat-down procedures for people with disabilities.”
Click here for the full report from MSNBC.com
‘Obama Was Born A Muslim Under Muslim Law’
August 20, 2010 by admin
Filed under News Stories
August 20th, 2010
The New York Times
By: Edward N. Luttwack
Barack Obama has emerged as a classic example of charismatic leadership — a figure upon whom others project their own hopes and desires. The resulting emotional intensity adds greatly to the more conventional strengths of the well-organized Obama campaign, and it has certainly sufficed to overcome the formidable initial advantages of Senator Hillary Clinton.
One danger of such charisma, however, is that it can evoke unrealistic hopes of what a candidate could actually accomplish in office regardless of his own personal abilities. Case in point is the oft-made claim that an Obama presidency would be welcomed by the Muslim world.
This idea often goes hand in hand with the altogether more plausible argument that Mr. Obama’s election would raise America’s esteem in Africa — indeed, he already arouses much enthusiasm in his father’s native Kenya and to a degree elsewhere on the continent.
But it is a mistake to conflate his African identity with his Muslim heritage. Senator Obama is half African by birth and Africans can understandably identify with him. In Islam, however, there is no such thing as a half-Muslim. Like all monotheistic religions, Islam is an exclusive faith.
As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mother’s Christian background is irrelevant.
Of course, as most Americans understand it, Senator Obama is not a Muslim. He chose to become a Christian, and indeed has written convincingly to explain how he arrived at his choice and how important his Christian faith is to him.
His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is “irtidad” or “ridda,” usually translated from the Arabic as “apostasy,” but with connotations of rebellion and treason. Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit, worse than murder (which the victim’s family may choose to forgive).
With few exceptions, the jurists of all Sunni and Shiite schools prescribe execution for all adults who leave the faith not under duress; the recommended punishment is beheading at the hands of a cleric, although in recent years there have been both stonings and hangings. (Some may point to cases in which lesser punishments were ordered — as with some Egyptian intellectuals who have been punished for writings that were construed as apostasy — but those were really instances of supposed heresy, not explicitly declared apostasy as in Senator Obama’s case.)
It is true that the criminal codes in most Muslim countries do not mandate execution for apostasy (although a law doing exactly that is pending before Iran’s Parliament and in two Malaysian states). But as a practical matter, in very few Islamic countries do the governments have sufficient authority to resist demands for the punishment of apostates at the hands of religious authorities.
For example, in Iran in 1994 the intervention of Pope John Paul II and others won a Christian convert a last-minute reprieve, but the man was abducted and killed shortly after his release. Likewise, in 2006 in Afghanistan, a Christian convert had to be declared insane to prevent his execution, and he was still forced to flee to Italy.
Because no government is likely to allow the prosecution of a President Obama — not even those of Iran and Saudi Arabia, the only two countries where Islamic religious courts dominate over secular law — another provision of Muslim law is perhaps more relevant: it prohibits punishment for any Muslim who kills any apostate, and effectively prohibits interference with such a killing.
At the very least, that would complicate the security planning of state visits by President Obama to Muslim countries, because the very act of protecting him would be sinful for Islamic security guards. More broadly, most citizens of the Islamic world would be horrified by the fact of Senator Obama’s conversion to Christianity once it became widely known — as it would, no doubt, should he win the White House. This would compromise the ability of governments in Muslim nations to cooperate with the United States in the fight against terrorism, as well as American efforts to export democracy and human rights abroad.
That an Obama presidency would cause such complications in our dealings with the Islamic world is not likely to be a major factor with American voters, and the implication is not that it should be. But of all the well-meaning desires projected on Senator Obama, the hope that he would decisively improve relations with the world’s Muslims is the least realistic.
