The Kevin Trudeau Show: 3-23-13
Today, Kevin contemplates the idea of running for office. What do you think? Help Kevin make the decision that could change America!
Self Help:
Where’s Your Vote?
Boost Your Immune System
Cleanses & Detoxes:
Mineral Detox
One Minute Cure Protocol
Miracle Mineral Solution
Candida Cleanse
Oral Chelation
Micro Plant Powder
Health:
Why Organic Milk Is Better For You
Missing DNA Promote Obesity
Where Have The Good Men Gone?
Men Report Sexual Impairment After Using Common Hair Loss Drug
Your PC, TV or Cell Phone May Be To Blame For Lack of Sleep
Diagnosing Rheumatoid Arthritis
Wealth:
Sorry State Of American Wage Earners
Why Inflation Hurts More Than It Did 30 Years Ago
Government:
11 Outrageous Taxes
Financial Aid for Illegal Students OK’d
NWO:
NSA Spying
30 Arrested at Rally for Wikileaks Suspect
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!
FDA Spied On Personal E-Mails Of Its Own Staff
January 30, 2012 by admin
Filed under News Stories
January 30, 2012
Washington Post
By Ellen Nakashima and Lisa Rein
The Food and Drug Administration secretly monitored the personal e-mail of a group of its own scientists and doctors after they warned Congress that the agency was approving medical devices that they believed posed unacceptable risks to patients, government documents show.
The surveillance — detailed in e-mails and memos unearthed by six of the scientists and doctors, who filed a lawsuit against the FDA in U.S. District Court in Washington last week — took place over two years as the plaintiffs accessed their personal Gmail accounts from government computers.
Information garnered this way eventually contributed to the harassment or dismissal of all six of the FDA employees, the suit alleges. All had worked in an office responsible for reviewing devices for cancer screening and other purposes.
Copies of the e-mails show that, starting in January 2009, the FDA intercepted communications with congressional staffers and draft versions of whistleblower complaints complete with editing notes in the margins. The agency also took electronic snapshots of the computer desktops of the FDA employees and reviewed documents they saved on the hard drives of their government computers.
FDA computers post a warning, visible when users log on, that they should have “no reasonable expectation of privacy” in any data passing through or stored on the system, and that the government may intercept any such data at any time for any lawful government purpose.
But in the suit, the doctors and scientists say the government violated their constitutional privacy rights by gazing into personal e-mail accounts for the purpose of monitoring activity that they say was lawful.
“Who would have thought that they would have the nerve to be monitoring my communications to Congress?” said Robert C. Smith, one of the plaintiffs in the suit, a former radiology professor at Yale and Cornell universities who worked as a device reviewer at the FDA until his contract was not renewed in July 2010. “How dare they?”
An FDA spokeswoman, Erica Jefferson, said the agency does not comment on litigation.
But according to FDA internal documents that the scientists and doctors obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, the agency told the Department of Health and Human Services’ inspector general that they had improperly disclosed confidential business information about the devices. The agency requested that an investigation be opened in May 2010.
Click here for the full report from the Washington Post.
Santorum Brokered Land Deal That Ripped Off American Veterans
January 25, 2012 by admin
Filed under News Stories
January 25, 2012
MotherJones
By Andy Kroll
Like any good presidential candidate, Rick Santorum heaps praise on America’s soldiers and veterans. He’s pledged to “make veterans a high priority” if elected president, adding, “This is not a Republican issue, this is not a Democratic issue, it is an American issue.” But as a US senator, Santorum engineered a controversial land deal that robbed the military’s top veterans’ home of tens of millions of dollars and worsened the deteriorating conditions at the facility.
The Armed Forces Retirement Home, which is run by the Department of Defense, bills itself as “premier home for military retirees and veterans.” The facility sprawls across 272 acres high on a hill in northern Washington, DC, near the Petworth neighborhood. The nearly 600 veterans who now live there enjoy panoramic views of the city—the Washington monument and US Capitol to the south, the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception to the east. At its peak, more than 2,000 veterans of World Wars I and II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War lived at the Home.
But with the rise of the smaller all-volunteer military, the Home began to run into serious financial problems. It was clear that one of its primary sources of revenue—a 50-cent deduction from the paychecks of active-duty servicemembers—wasn’t enough to keep the Home operating fully. In the 1990s, the Home scrambled to find ways to avoid insolvency, trimming its staff by 24 percent and reducing its vet population by 800. Still, the money problems began to show, with its older historic facilities slipping into disrepair and decay. To grapple with its worsening shortfall, officials running the Home eyed a valuable, 49-acre piece of land worth $49 million as a potential financial lifeline.
Click here for the full report from MotherJones.
State For Sale
October 3, 2011 by admin
Filed under News Stories
October 3rd, 2011
The New Yorker
By: Jane Mayer
In the spring of 2010, the conservative political strategist Ed Gillespie flew from Washington, D.C., to Raleigh, North Carolina, to spend a day laying the groundwork for REDMAP, a new project aimed at engineering a Republican takeover of state legislatures. Gillespie hoped to help his party get control of statehouses where congressional redistricting was pending, thereby leveraging victories in cheap local races into a means of shifting the balance of power in Washington. It was an ingenious plan, and Gillespie is a skilled tactician—he once ran the Republican National Committee—but REDMAP seemed like a long shot in North Carolina. Barack Obama carried the state in 2008 and remained popular. The Republicans hadn’t controlled both houses of the North Carolina General Assembly for more than a century. (“Not since General Sherman,” a state politico joked to me.) That day in Raleigh, though, Gillespie had lunch with an ideal ally: James Arthur (Art) Pope, the chairman and C.E.O. of Variety Wholesalers, a discount-store conglomerate. The Raleigh News and Observer had called Pope, a conservative multimillionaire, the Knight of the Right. The REDMAP project offered Pope a new way to spend his money.
That fall, in the remote western corner of the state, John Snow, a retired Democratic judge who had represented the district in the State Senate for three terms, found himself subjected to one political attack after another. Snow, who often voted with the Republicans, was considered one of the most conservative Democrats in the General Assembly, and his record reflected the views of his constituents. His Republican opponent, Jim Davis—an orthodontist loosely allied with the Tea Party—had minimal political experience, and Snow, a former college football star, was expected to be reëlected easily. Yet somehow Davis seemed to have almost unlimited money with which to assail Snow.
Snow recalls, “I voted to help build a pier with an aquarium on the coast, as did every other member of the North Carolina House and Senate who voted.” But a television attack ad presented the “luxury pier” as Snow’s wasteful scheme. “We’ve lost jobs,” an actress said in the ad. “John Snow’s solution for our economy? ‘Go fish!’ ” A mass mailing, decorated with a cartoon pig, denounced the pier as one of Snow’s “pork projects.” It criticized Snow for “wasting our tax dollars,” citing his vote to “spend $218,000 on a Shakespeare festival,” but failing to note that this sum represented a budget cut for the program, which had been funded by the legislature since 1999.
In all, Snow says, he was the target of two dozen mass mailings, one of them reminiscent of the Willie Horton ad that became notorious during the 1988 Presidential campaign. It featured a photograph of Henry Lee McCollum, a menacing-looking African-American convict on death row, who, along with three other men, raped and murdered an eleven-year-old girl. After describing McCollum’s crimes in lurid detail, the mailing noted, “Thanks to arrogant State Senator John Snow, McCollum could soon be let off of death row.” Snow, in fact, supported the death penalty and had prosecuted murder cases. But, in 2009, he had helped pass a new state law, the Racial Justice Act, that enabled judges to reconsider a death sentence if a convict could prove that the jury’s verdict had been tainted by racism. The law was an attempt to address the overwhelming racial disparity in capital sentences.
“The attacks just went on and on,” Snow told me recently. “My opponents used fear tactics. I’m a moderate, but they tried to make me look liberal.” On Election Night, he lost by an agonizingly slim margin—fewer than two hundred votes.
After the election, the North Carolina Free Enterprise Foundation, a nonpartisan, pro-business organization, revealed that two seemingly independent political groups had spent several hundred thousand dollars on ads against Snow—a huge amount in a poor, backwoods district. Art Pope was instrumental in funding and creating both groups, Real Jobs NC and Civitas Action. Real Jobs NC was responsible for the “Go fish!” ad and the mass mailing that attacked Snow’s “pork projects.” The racially charged ad was produced by the North Carolina Republican Party, and Pope says that he was not involved in its creation. But Pope and three members of his family gave the Davis campaign a four-thousand-dollar check each—the maximum individual donation allowed by state law.
Snow, whose defeat was first chronicled by the Institute for Southern Studies, a progressive nonprofit organization, told me, “It’s getting to the point where, in politics, money is the most important thing. They spent nearly a million dollars to win that seat. A lot of it was from corporations and outside groups related to Art Pope. He was their sugar daddy.”
Bob Phillips, the head of the North Carolina chapter of Common Cause, an organization that promotes campaign-finance reform, said that Snow’s loss signals a troubling trend in American politics. “John Snow raised a significant amount of money,” he said. “But it was exceeded by what outside groups spent in that race, mostly on commercials against John Snow.” Such lopsided campaigns will likely become more common, thanks to the Supreme Court, which, in a controversial ruling in January, 2010, struck down limits on corporate campaign spending. For the first time in more than a century, businesses and unions can spend unlimited sums to express support or opposition to candidates.
Phillips argues that the Court’s decision, in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, has been a “game changer,” especially in the realm of state politics. In swing states like North Carolina—which the Democrats consider so important that they have scheduled their 2012 National Convention there—an individual donor, particularly one with access to corporate funds, can play a significant, and sometimes decisive, role. “We didn’t have that before 2010,” Phillips says. “Citizens United opened up the door. Now a candidate can literally be outspent by independent groups. We saw it in North Carolina, and a lot of the money was traced back to Art Pope.”
Click here for the full report from The New Yorker
Government Shutdown Threat Prompts Obama, GOP To Scramble To Strike Budget Deal
April 8, 2011 by admin
Filed under News Stories
April 8th, 2011
The Huffington Post
Uncomfortably close to a deadline, President Barack Obama and top congressional leaders have only hours to avert a Friday midnight government shutdown that all sides say would inconvenience millions of people and damage a still fragile economy.
Obama said he still hoped to announce an agreement on Friday but did not have “wild optimism.”
In revealing nothing about what still divides them, Obama and the lawmakers, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., all said another late night of talks in the Oval Office had narrowed their differences over cutting federal spending and other matters.
But Obama said ominously that the machinery of a shutdown was already in motion.
“I expect an answer in the morning,” Obama told reporters Thursday evening as representatives from the White House and Capitol Hill plunged ahead with negotiations into the night.
The aides were trying to cobble together a deal on how much federal spending to slash, where to cut it and what caveats to attach as part of a bill to fund the government through Sept. 30. A temporary federal spending measure expires at midnight Friday.
As the pressure mounted, Obama abruptly postponed plans to promote his agenda in Indiana on Friday.
For a nation eager to trim to federal spending but also weary of Washington bickering, the spending showdown had real implications.
A closure would mean the furloughs of hundreds of thousands of workers and the services they provide, from processing many tax refunds to approving business loans. Medical research would be disrupted, national parks would close and most travel visa and passport services would stop, among many others.
Click here for the full report from the Huffington Post
The Kevin Trudeau Show: 3-21-11
Today, Kevin contemplates the idea of running for office. What do you think? Help Kevin make the decision that could change America!
Self Help:
Where’s Your Vote?
Boost Your Immune System
Cleanses & Detoxes:
Mineral Detox
One Minute Cure Protocol
Miracle Mineral Solution
Candida Cleanse
Oral Chelation
Micro Plant Powder
Health:
Why Organic Milk Is Better For You
Missing DNA Promote Obesity
Where Have The Good Men Gone?
Men Report Sexual Impairment After Using Common Hair Loss Drug
Your PC, TV or Cell Phone May Be To Blame For Lack of Sleep
Diagnosing Rheumatoid Arthritis
Wealth:
Sorry State Of American Wage Earners
Why Inflation Hurts More Than It Did 30 Years Ago
Government:
11 Outrageous Taxes
Financial Aid for Illegal Students OK’d
NWO:
NSA Spying
30 Arrested at Rally for Wikileaks Suspect
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!
Taxpayers Making Federal Workers Rich
December 20, 2010 by admin
Filed under News Stories
December 20th, 2010
Business Insider
By: Michael Snyder
Do you remember the days when getting elected to Congress or choosing to work for the government was referred to as “public service”?
The idea was that you would be making a sacrifice for the greater good of the country. Well, those days are long gone.
Click here to see 12 infuriating facts
Today, getting elected to Congress or working for the federal government is a good way to get rich.
Median household income in the United States fell from $51,726 in 2008 to $50,221 in 2009, and yet the personal wealth of members of Congress and the salaries of federal workers (especially at the higher levels) continue to explode. A lot of corrupt politicians and federal fat cats are raking in stunning amounts of cash, and we are the ones paying the bill. There is certainly nothing wrong with making a lot of money, but does it seem right that so many of our “public servants” are getting filthy rich while so many of the rest of us are barely getting by?
Posted below are 12 facts that will blow your mind. Most Americans have no idea just how obscenely wealthy many members of Congress are, and most Americans are totally clueless about how cushy some of these U.S. government jobs are. If there is one place in America where the good times are still rolling (other than Wall Street), it would have to be Washington D.C.
Members of Congress and employees of the government are supposed to work for us. We are the ones who pay their salaries. But today, they are the ones “living the dream” while most of the rest of us scramble just to survive from month to month….
Click here for the full report from the Business Insider
The Kevin Trudeau Show: 11-9-10
Today, Kevin reveals the top four things happening right now that have been designed to keep you fearful and alter your perception of what you consider ‘normal.’
Self Help:
Have Dinner With KT
Weight Loss Cure
Health:
290,000 Eggs Recalled Due To Salmonella At Ohio Egg Farm
Drug Company Money Affects Doctors’ Prescriptions
Cancer Patients Radioactive!
Drug Companies Hire Troubled Doctors As Experts
Cancer Is Purely Man Made Say Scientists
Amino Acids In Watermelon Lower Blood Pressure
Abbott Labs Sold Bug Tainted Baby Formula
Why Technology Is Really Bad For Your Health
Wealth:
As Fed Policy Sinks, The Dollar Prices of Essentials Soar
Government:
Supreme Court Weighs Consequences of Vaccine Cases
US Not Tracking Afghan Spending
Wall Street Mogul Picked For State Department Post
NWO:
Launch of Unknown Missile Caught on Tape in California
Strange Signal Comes From Alien Planet
NASA Digitally Alters Picture
Everything Kevin:
Become An Insider!
Support Kevin!
Kevin is on YouTube!
Sign Up For Kevin’s FREE Podcast
Follow Kevin on Twitter
Become Kevin’s Friend on Facebook
Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
Click HERE to watch the Kevin Trudeau Show LIVE!
Washington To Give Pakistan Military $2 Billion
October 22, 2010 by admin
Filed under News Stories
October 22nd, 2010
BBC
By: Kim Ghattas
The US has announced a $2bn (£1.3bn) package of military and security aid to Pakistan over five years on the final day of US-Pakistan strategic talks.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton unveiled the deal, which is subject to Congressional approval.
But the Obama administration will make clear it expects Islamabad to do more in the fight against Islamic militants.
The US has given Pakistan more than $1bn of military aid a year since 2005; last fiscal year, it gave nearly $2bn.
US officials said Pakistan needed further, specific assistance for the fight against militants and needed to know it could rely on the US in the long term.
So unlike previous military aid approved on a yearly basis, this is a five-year package.
The aid will pay for equipment needed in counter-insurgency and counter-terror operations, among other things.
‘Reducing threats to US’
Vali Nasr, a senior adviser on Pakistan and Afghanistan at the state department, told the BBC that the battle against Pakistani militants had expanded over the last year, but the summer’s monsoon floods had undone a lot of the Pakistani army’s efforts.
“We believe that we have made a great deal of progress and we believe that that progress has reduced the threat to our homeland, while not eliminating it,” Richard Holbrooke, the US special representative on Afghanistan and Pakistan, said this week.
But officials in Washington have also been frustrated at the limits of Pakistan’s desire and ability to help.
A White House report sent to Congress earlier this month lamented the Pakistani army’s inability to hold territory it had seized from insurgents, a failure that means gains are likely to be short-lived.
“The Pakistan military continued to avoid military engagements that would put it in direct conflict with Afghan Taliban or al-Qaeda’s forces in North Waziristan,” the report said, referring to the region in north-western Pakistan seen as a Taliban and al-Qaeda haven.
“This is as much a political choice as it is a reflection of an under-resourced military prioritising its targets.”
The report also said the civilian leadership did not have the trust of the people and faced “broad-based” challenges that had “the potential to impact the stability of the government”.
Cross-border attack
Mr Nasr said the solution was not to withdraw US investment from Pakistan, but rather to help the Pakistani government and military strengthen the country’s institutions.
The Pakistani government is in fact crucial to that strategy, and this can make Washington vulnerable.
A crisis in ties between the two countries last month has highlighted the fine line the Obama administration must walk as it cajoles and pressures its ally.
After at least two Pakistani troops were killed in a Nato cross-border attack in September, a furious Islamabad blocked the main transit route for military supplies to Afghanistan until it received a formal apology.
During the row, dozens of lorries laden with fuel and supplies were destroyed by militants in Pakistan while en route to the frontier.
The US-Pakistan strategic dialogue, which started last year, is designed to build trust and keep the conversation going between the two countries, not just about security, but about a wide range of issues from healthcare to education and water projects.
‘Not enough sticks’
The five-year package announced on Friday is meant to complement a $7.5bn package of civilian aid over five years that was approved by the US in 2009.
It is all designed to reduce Islamic militants’ allure and to win Pakistanis’ hearts.
“We want to expand the security relationship that Pakistan and the US had in the past under the Bush period to be much broader,” Mr Nasr said, “to involve things that also matter to Pakistanis and impacts their daily lives.
“A relationship means that we don’t focus only on things that are important to us, but also things that are important to Pakistanis.
“Average Pakistanis have to see value in their engagement with the US before they subscribe to that relationship.”
But some question the Obama administration’s approach, saying there are too many carrots and not enough sticks, and not enough conditions attached to the carrots.
In a piece published in the New York Times this week, the former ambassador to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, urged Washington to “offer Islamabad a stark choice between positive incentives and negative consequences”.
Click here for the full report from the BBC
Nasa Could Land Probe On Asteroid Aiming Towards Earth
August 10, 2010 by admin
Filed under News Stories
August 10, 2010
Telegraph
By: Heidi Blake
Asteroid 1999 RQ36, which has a one-in-1,000 chance of hitting the Earth before the year 2200, would cause an explosion equivalent to hundreds of nuclear bombs detonating at once.
An analysis of its orbit has predicted that it is most likely to hit us on September 24, 2182 but scientists want to collect a sample of the rock to help forecast its trajectory more accurately.
If Nasa gives the plan the green light, the spacecraft would blast off in 2106 to map out and collect rock samples from the asteroid, which is 1,800 feet-wide.
The planned mission, called OSIRIS-Rex, is one of two finalists in competition for funding as part of the cash-strapped US space agency’s New Frontiers program.
The other contender is a mission to land on Venus. The competing plans will come under discussion at a two-day Nasa workshop in Washington DC starting on today. The winner will be announced next year.
Nasa has officially classified RQ36 as a ‘potentially hazardous asteroid’ as it passes within about 280,000 miles of Earth. Its orbit, which brings it closer to Earth, makes it easier to reach than other asteroids.
Michael Drake, who would lead the OSIRIS-Rex team if the project was chosen, said: “Being one of the easiest targets to get to coincidentally means that it also can easily hit us, too.”
Clark Chapman, a planetary scientist at Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colorado, said an impact from RQ36 would cause a catastrophic explosion.
“It would be an enormous impact, like hundreds of the biggest nuclear bombs ever built exploding at once, creating a crater maybe 10 kilometers across,” he told National Geographic magazine.
An expert panel appointed by Barack Obama, the US president, to assess Nasa’s future space programme last year recommended bypassing the Moon in favour of a mission to land on an unidentified asteroid.
The plan mirrors the plot of the 1998 Hollywood film Deep Impact, in which the White House sends a spaceship to land on an asteroid which is hurtling towards the Earth.
The European Space Agency announced in 2008 that it plans to select a small asteroid, less than 0.6 miles across, near Earth and send a spacecraft to drill for dust and rubble for analysis.
