Category Archives: illegal immigration

Tuesday Funnies!

. . . and political truth memes.

This gives new meaning to the expression “narrow escape”:

H/t Auntie Lulu

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Nancy Pelosi wished everyone ‘Happy Thanksgiving’ on Valentine’s Day

Celebrating President Trump’s signing of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2019 (aka budget deal) that provides only $1.4 billion for “pedestrian fencing,” not walls, along the US-Mexican border, instead of the $5+ billion requested by Trump, Nancy Pelosi had another episode of what some politely call “brain-freeze”. She said:

“Happy Valentine’s Day. We saluted our victory – or the victory for the American people – earlier with chocolate. Chocolate from California, I call it the champagne of chocolate. So again, I wish you all a Happy Thanksgiving. You should go home now to your loved ones.”

This is not the first time Pelosi had “brain freeze”. She often slurs her speech and appears disoriented.

It is not far-fetched to suspect the Speaker of the House has senile dementia.

In October 2017, the Boston Globe reported that Grubb’s Pharmacy in Washington, DC, has a cozy arrangement with members of Congress whereby it delivers drugs to their attending physicians. The drugs include prescriptions to treat the incurable Alzheimer’s disease, the most common form of senile dementia.

See also “Ann Coulter: By signing the budget deal, Trump signs away his right as CIC to build the wall”.

H/t Vivian Lee & Big Lug.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Liberal utopia of California: Survey shows 53% want to leave the state

The streets of San Francisco…

From SF Gate: Dreaming of greener (read: cheaper) pastures? You’re not alone.

According to a new survey by Edelman Intelligence, 53 percent of Californians are considering moving out of state due to the high cost of living. Millennials are even more likely to flee the Golden State — 63 percent of them said they want to.

Bay Area residents surveyed were especially sensitive to affordability issues, and it’s no surprise. The median home value in San Francisco is $1.37 million, according to Zillow, and $1.09 million in San Jose. In Edelman’s survey, 76 percent of Bay Area residents say they consider cost and availability of housing to be a serious issue.

Sixty-two percent also call homelessness a very serious issue for California.

It appears the housing and homelessness crises have led to a pessimistic outlook: 62 percent of those surveyed say the best days of living in California are behind them.

The trend is backed up by much of SFGATE’s past reporting. We’ve spoken with people who’ve left California for the Pacific Northwest, Texas and Denver — all popular destinations for Bay Area ex-pats. Nearly everyone we talked to cites the high cost of living as the primary reason they left. Others were looking for a slower pace of life, lower taxes, less traffic and more time with family.

There have been other signs of the California exodus. In December, it was revealed that one of the most frequently Googled questions in California last year was “Should I move out?”

The Bay Area was also found to be leading the nation in outward migration, meaning more people are leaving the region than moving in. However, most people who moved out of the Bay Area didn’t go too far; the number one destination was Sacramento, followed by Los Angeles, Seattle, Portland and San Diego.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

U of Texas professor José Gutierrez defends his ‘eliminate the gringo’ quote

There’s a meme circulating in the AltMedia, of a quote attributed to José Angel Gutierrez:

So I looked into this, to ascertain the meme’s authenticity.

Gutierrez indeed is a professor of political science at the University of Texas – Arlington. Below is a screenshot I took of his page on UOT’s website. Note the “Proffessor” typo:

In defense of himself, Gutierrez wrote this essay for The Texas Civil Rights Review, which calls itself the “Lone Star of Conscience”.

Below is the essay in its entirety (I added the bold red emphasis). Read it, and tell me what you think.

THE ORIGINS OF THE “ELIMINATE THE GRINGO” QUOTE

By Jose Angel Gutierrez ⋅ July 21, 2010

Originally published en espanol in La Estrella newspaper of Fort Worth, reprinted by permission of author.

I was the head of the Mexican American Youth Organization (MAYO) in Texas in 1969 having just return from military duty during the Vietnam War. I held a press conference in San Antonio, Texas on April 11, 1969 to announce our organizational plans.

This is what I said:

“MAYO had found that both federal and religious programs aimed at social change do not meet the needs of the Mexicanos of this state.

“Further, we find that the vicious cultural genocide being inflicted upon La Raza by gringos and their institutions not only severely damage our human dignity but also make it impossible for La Raza to develop its right of self-determination.

“For these reasons, top priority is given to identifying and exposing the gringo. We also promote the social welfare of Mexicanos through education designed to enlarge the capabilities of indigenous leaders.

“We hope to secure our human and civil rights, to eliminate bigotry and racism, to lessen the tensions in our barrios and combat the deterioration of our communities.

“Our organization, largely comprised of youth, is committed to effecting meaningful social change. Social change that will enable La Raza to become masters of their destiny, owners of their resources, both human and natural, and a culturally and spiritually separate people from the gringo.

“Only through this program, we of MAYO, see the possibility of surviving this century as a free and complete family of Mexicanos. We will not try to assimilate into this gringo society in Texas, nor will we encourage anybody else to do so.

“Rather, MAYO once again asks of friends here and across the nation to assist us in our efforts. We intend to become free as a people in order to enjoy the abundance of our country and share it with those less fortunate.

“MAYO will not engage in controversy with fellow Mexicanos regardless of how unfounded and vindictive their accusations may be. We realize that the effects of cultural genocide takes many forms—some Mexicanos will become psychologically castrated, others will become demagogues and gringos as well and others will come together, resist and eliminate the gringo. We will be the latter.

Questions followed the press statement, particularly from Kemper Diehl, a reporter with the San Antonio Express News. He wrote an article on the press conference and printed his version of an exchange:

Q: What do you mean by ‘eliminate the gringo?’

A: “You can eliminate an individual in various ways. You can certainly kill him but that is not our intent at this moment. You can remove the base of support that he operates from be it economic, political, social. That is what we intend to do.”

Kemper Diehl wrote more: “Gutierrez was again pressed as to intentions of killing gringos ‘if worst comes to worst.’ He replied ‘If worst comes to worst and we have to resort to that means, it would be self-defense.’ ” Gutierrez went on to be quoted as detailing attempts on his life and property just a few years before.

For the record, this was a press conference 38 years ago! It was not a press conference held yesterday much less statements made by me in my class room at the university. Since immigration and anti-Mexican attitudes are now the talk of the day particularly on national radio and television I have been resurrected.

Lastly, about 2 years ago Alan Wall that works and lives in Mexico put together words as if they were mine and posted them on VDARE.com claiming they were mine. Soon these quotes appeared in many extreme right wing websites. Two months ago David Horowitz included me in a list of the 101 Most Dangerous Professors in the United States and cited these Allan Wall quotes as his evidence. Reporters today are now citing them over and over again today.

Because of this the FBI came to see me and warn me that some people want to kill me. I cannot stop crazies from believing these lies. This will pass. In the meantime realize that the white hate aimed against me now is really the same white hate aimed at all of us of Mexican ancestry residing in the US.

-End of Gutierrez’s essay-

I find it noteworthy that no where in his essay does Gutierrez actually denounce or renounce having said:

  1. Mexicanos will not try to assimilate into the U.S. or encourage others to assimilate.
  2. Eliminate the gringo by killing them. He merely said it wasn’t his intention “at the moment,” which implies he reserves killing gringo for some future time. (Note: “gringo” is a term used in Latin America to refer to a foreigner, especially one of U.S. descent.)

All Gutierrez did in his essay is make the excuse that he said “eliminate the gringo” 41 years ago, in 1969. But since he neither denounces nor renounces that statement, what difference is it that he said it many years ago?

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Ann Coulter: By signing the budget deal, Trump signs away his right as CIC to build the wall

Yesterday afternoon, the AP reported that “The White House confirms that President Donald Trump will sign a bill averting a potential partial government shutdown at the end of the week.”

At the same time, “Press Secretary Sarah Sanders says Trump will also take ‘other executive action — including a national emergency’ as he seeks to keep his border wall pledge.” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) confirmed that Trump would quickly declare a national emergency, so as to divert money from other budget projects into building the southern border wall.

According to Ann Coulter, however, by signing the budget deal, Donald Trump has signed away his right as commander in chief to build a wall.

On the Lars Larson radio show yesterday, Coulter said (beg. 1:00 mark):

“It’s over…. I’ve been one saying since November 8, ‘Hey, you’re commander in chief. You have always had authority to build the wall. That is part of your job description.‘ They’ve talked about national emergency, and his special emergency powers, whether he uses that or not, he’s the commander in chief and his job is to keep America safe.

But now, he signed a bill in which he has signed those powers away. The bill that he signed prohibits any part of the wall going any place on our border. It allows not the prototypes, not a wall, but some gentle pedestrian bollard fencing, in one small section, the Santa Fe section, but only if the local authorities agree….

It’s worse than amnesty — it’s a pre-approved amnesty. You may not be deported if an ‘unaccompanied child’ is a member of your household. This will put human smuggling into overdrive. You could be an MS-13 member, anyone, any illegal in this country, just get a kid in the household, just traffick that child across the border, you got amnesty! That’s the bill he signed.

They’ll try to go to the Supreme Court and say, ‘Hey, I’m Commander In Chief! It’s my job to defend America!’. And the Supreme Court will say, ‘That’s funny, because whose signature is this on a bill that says the commander in chief isn’t allowed to build a wall? Whose John Hancock is on this?’

He has just signed away his inherent powers under the Constitution. It is over. There will not be a fence, there will not be a wall, there will not be a garden trellis, and there will be mass amnesty and open borders like you’ve never seen before. The country’s over, there’s no point to what you do, there’s no point to what I do, there’s no point to listening to this radio show because the whole country goes the way of California. America was nice while it lasted, but they outmaneuvered us, the people who wanted to destroy this country….

This bill passed the United States Senate 83 to 16. I understand some of the Democrats voted against it, so it won’t be held against them, they can’t be blamed for open borders. You know who can be? The guy who put his John Hancock on the bill — Donald Trump. Full open borders like something Hillary Clinton couldn’t have gotten through.”

So, is Ann Coulter correct in her assertions?

In seeking to confirm/disconfirm what Coulter said, I tried to find the primary source — the budget deal itself.

Infuriatingly, I couldn’t find a link to, or even the name of the budget deal in any of the news reports on the agreement. So I went to Congress.gov, and found the budget agreement among the 31 bill texts that Congress.gov received yesterday.

This is what H.J.Resolution 31: The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2019, which was passed by both the House and the Senate, and presented to President Trump today, says, which confirms what Ann Coulter said:

(1) Effective amnesty, i.e., no deportation, for illegals with an unaccompanied child:

Title II, Sec. 224. (a) None of the funds provided by this Act or any other Act, or provided from any accounts in the Treasury of the United States derived by the collection of fees available to the components funded by this Act, may be used by the Secretary of Homeland Security to place in detention, remove, refer for a decision whether to initiate removal proceedings, or initiate removal proceedings against a sponsor, potential sponsor, or member of a household of a sponsor or potential
sponsor of an unaccompanied alien child (as defined in section 462(g) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 279(g))) based on information shared by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

(2) No wall, but only pedestrian fencing may be built on the border:

Title II. Sec. 230. (a) Of the total amount made available under “U.S. Customs and Border Protection–Procurement, Construction, and Improvements”,$2,370,222,000 shall be available only as follows:
(1) $1,375,000,000 is for the construction of primary pedestrian fencing, including levee pedestrian fencing, in the Rio Grande Valley Sector;

Sec. 230. (b) The amounts designated in subsection (a)(1) shall only be available for operationally effective designs deployed as of the date of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 (Public Law 115-31), such as currently deployed steel bollard designs, that prioritize agent safety.

(3) Not even pedestrian fencing in these areas:

Sec. 231. None of the funds made available by this Act or prior Acts are available for the construction of pedestrian fencing–
(1) within the Santa Ana Wildlife Refuge;
(2) within the Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park;
(3) within La Lomita Historical park;
(4) within the National Butterfly Center; or
(5) within or east of the Vista del Mar Ranch tract of the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge.

(4) Construction of pedestrian border fencing is subject to local authorities’ approval (which means there won’t even be pedestrian fencing in places like California):

Sec. 232. (a) Prior to use of any funds made available by this Act for the construction of physical barriers within the city limits of any city or census designated place described in subsection (c), the Department of Homeland Security and the local elected officials of such a city or census designated place shall confer and seek to reach mutual agreement regarding the design and alignment of physical barriers within that city or the census designated place (as the case may be). Such consultations shall continue until September 30, 2019 (or until agreement is reached, if earlier) and may be extended beyond that date by agreement of the parties, and no funds made available in this Act shall be used for such construction while consultations are continuing.

Sec. 232. (c) The cities and census designated place described in this subsection are as follows:
(1) Roma, Texas.
(2) Rio Grande City, Texas.
(3) Escobares, Texas.
(4) La Grulla, Texas.
(5) The census designated place of Salineno, Texas.

While what Ann Coulter said about the budget deal — the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2019 — is true, does this mean that by signing the bill, President Trump effectively signed away his right as commander in chief to build a border wall?

Certainly, for Trump not to sign the bill would mean another government shut down — and government shut down has shown itself to be ineffective in pressuring the Demonrats to allocate the $5+ billion Trump wants to build the wall. But by signing the bill, Trump in effect agrees to the bill’s provisions, including its stipulation that the funds Congress has allocated for border security can only be spent on pedestrian fencing, instead of a wall.

But that doesn’t mean President Trump can’t muster funds outside of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018 to build the wall, on the grounds of national emergency. Whether that will work remains to be seen.

H/t Auntie Lulu

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Trump to declare national emergency to build border wall

Breaking News

Earlier today, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) said President Donald Trump will sign Congress’ border security compromise, which is really a bi-partisan collusion for open borders.

The product of nearly three weeks of talks, the agreement provides almost $1.4 billion for new barriers along the boundary, which is less than the $1.6 billion for border security in a bipartisan Senate bill that Trump had spurned months ago. The $1.4 billion is enough for building just 55 miles of barricades, not the 200-plus miles President Trump seeks.

The agreement also contains other hamstrings on border security, including:

  • The word “wall” does not appear once in the 1,768 pages of the budget agreement. Instead of “wall” are the words “barriers” and “fencing”.
  • Less funding for ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), in order to pressure ICE to detain fewer illegal “immigrants”.
  • “Humanitarian aid” for detained illegals.

Mere minutes ago, the AP reports:

The White House confirms that President Donald Trump will sign a bill averting a potential partial government shutdown at the end of the week.

Press Secretary Sarah Sanders says Trump will also take “other executive action — including a national emergency” as he seeks to keep his border wall pledge. The bipartisan congressional legislation expected to pass Thursday includes only a fraction of the billions of dollars Trump is seeking to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border….

McConnell also said Trump would quickly declare a national emergency. The president has said that move would give him power to divert money from other budget projects into wall building.

McConnell also said he would support Trump’s emergency declaration. That was a turnabout for the Kentucky Republican, who like Democrats and many Republicans has until now opposed such a declaration.

An emergency declaration to shift funding from other federal priorities to the border is expected to face swift legal challenge.

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Gov. Newsom pulling National Guard from border to fight “real threats”

From SF Gate: Gov. Gavin Newsom will withdraw most of the California National Guard troops who were deployed to the U.S.-Mexico border last year, saying the state needs them to prepare for wildfires and fight drug trafficking rather than bolster President Trump’s response to a “manufactured” immigration crisis.

Newsom said he will rescind authorization Monday for the deployment of the Guard troops, which Trump requested and then-Gov. Jerry Brown approved in April. Brown extended the deployment in September, and the state’s 360 Guard troops were scheduled to stay on the border through March.

Brown declared last year that “California National Guard will not be enforcing federal immigration laws.” Newsom’s office, however, said the troops were operating cameras along the border, doing vehicle maintenance and performing other jobs that would normally fall to federal agencies, freeing up resources for U.S. Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

Voice of San Diego, an online news outlet, reported in August that in at least two cases, Border Patrol agents apprehended immigrants crossing into the state illegally after being notified by California National Guard troops.

Newsom’s withdrawal order comes one day before he delivers his first State of the State address at 11 a.m. Tuesday. According to excerpts of the speech released by his office, the governor will say that “the border ‘emergency’ is a manufactured crisis. And California will not be part of this political theater.

“Which is why I have given the National Guard a new mission. They will refocus on the real threats facing our state.” The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Under the new order Newsom intends to sign, 110 Guard troops now at the border will be redeployed to help the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection with fire prevention efforts, and 100 troops will conduct antidrug trafficking intelligence operations, including screening cargo at points of entry. Newsom will also request funding from the U.S. Defense Department to expand the state Guard’s antidrug task force by at least 150 members.

“This is our answer to the White House: No more division, xenophobia or nativism,” Newsom plans to say in his State of the State speech.

Read the whole story here.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Multimillionaire actor John Cusack is a socialist who can’t spell

Actor John Cusack, 52, is high-school graduate who dropped out of New York University after one year, saying he just had “too much fire in his belly” for college. He then went into acting and is probably best known for director Roland Emmerich’s 2009 disaster film 2012, in which Cusack played a struggling novelist who saves the world from the apocalypse.

Although John Cusack is very white (Irish American) and one of the wealthiest of Americans, with an estimated net worth of $50 million, he is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, which espouses socialism, “internationalism” (globalism), LGBT rights, and anti-white and anti-male supremacy “socialist feminism”. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) is also a member of the Democratic Socialists of America; millionaire Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) is a self-described “democratic socialist”.

Cusack’s socialism (Medicare for all; Green New Deal is not about energy, but a way to “transform the country”), anti-GOP (“gop deathkkkult”), and hysterical anti-Trumpism (Trump colludes with the Russians; is a “nazi” who uses “deception”, “lies”, “gulags”, “internment camps”; and “tortures” and “abducts” children) are amply revealed in his tweets, which are replete with cringe-inducing spelling/grammatical errors that are not mere typos because there are so many of them.

Below is a sample of his latest tweets. Cusack’s politics are underlined in red; his spelling/grammatical errors are circled in red.

If you patronize this faux socialist by watching his movies and TV, you’re contributing to his $50 million fortune and enabling his political activism.

See also “John Cusack Wishes Satanic Death on Fox and Republicans“.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Oregon judge rules that regional correction center can’t notify ICE of inmate releases but can house ICE detainees

Oregon demorats continue to provide illegal alien criminals with protection via their sanctuary state law. See the following examples:

Sanctuary Oregon: ICE put hold months ago on illegal alien now accused of killing his wife

Sanctuary Oregon: Young couple killed on motorcycle by drunk illegal alien

Sanctuary Oregon: Illegal alien who was previously deported accused of nail gun rampage

This latest ruling still provides certain protections for those illegally in our country.

From Oregon Live: A Wasco County judge ruled Friday that two immigration enforcement practices at the Northern Oregon Regional Corrections Center violate the state’s sanctuary law but upheld the jail’s contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The jail in The Dalles houses inmates for Wasco, Hood River, Sherman and Gilliam counties. But under an interagency agreement reached in 1999, it also has housed people detained by ICE on illegal immigration allegations.

Wasco County Circuit Judge John Wolf found that the regional jail’s past policy of notifying ICE agents of scheduled releases of inmates in state or local criminal cases violated Oregon law that prohibits using state resources to solely detain someone based on an alleged immigration violation. The judge also ruled the jail can’t hold inmates for ICE beyond the time that they would face for their criminal charge.

Yet the judge didn’t nullify the regional jail’s contract with the federal immigration enforcement agency.

The jail’s contract “to accept and provide for secure custody’’ of federal detainees didn’t violate state law, Wolf ruled. The judge considered the “ordinary meaning’’ of the word “apprehending’’ from the state sanctuary law to mean arresting or seizing someone, not holding someone in jail.

Wolf’s ruling means ICE will still be able to house at the regional jail people it detains for alleged immigration violations who are awaiting transportation to prison or a hearing on their immigration status or deportation.

The plaintiffs — Wasco County taxpayers who filed the lawsuit in 2017 — and the regional jail each declared a win.

“We are pleased with the court’s decision that NORCOR is violating Oregon law in some respects, but disappointed by the court’s decision with respect to the ICE contract,’’ said attorney Erin M. Pettigrew of Innovation Law Lab. “It was a mixed bag for both parties.’’

Attorney Derek Ashton, who represents the regional jail, said he was pleased with the decision upholding the jail’s contract with ICE. “The contract at issue is critical to NORCOR’s budget and operations and eases a tax burden on the people of Wasco, Hood River, Sherman and Gilliam counties,” he said in a statement. “Today’s decision ensures that critical funding source will remain in place.”

The plaintiffs had alleged misuse of tax revenues for immigration enforcement. They established it costs $97 a day to house an inmate at the jail, and ICE reimburses the jail $80 an inmate.

As the suit was pending, the regional jail changed its policy in April.

Before then, NORCOR would notify ICE when a state or local inmate was scheduled for release on bail, on their own recognizance or after completing a sentence. ICE would then ask the jail through a paper form to detain the inmate longer on a federal hold. ICE would pay NORCOR to house the inmates once the “paper transfer’’ was done.

But the judge said that the form wasn’t an arrest warrant, didn’t show any show probable cause and wasn’t signed by a judge. “When a state or local inmate is no longer subject to custody on those charges, NORCOR does not have authority to maintain custody and must release the inmate,” Wolf ruled.

Since April, the jail has informed ICE of an inmate’s date of release, and if federal agents are present at the jail they may arrest the person in the lobby or the person is free to leave. A released inmate arrested by ICE in the lobby may be turned back to NORCOR to be held under the interagency agreement.

The judge’s ruled Friday, however, that any release notification by the jail to the federal agency violated the state’s sanctuary law.

Read the whole story here.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Jeff Bezos gave just 0.0906 percent of his money to charity

Shocker, not.

From NY Post: For the world’s richest man, charity begins — and stays — at home.

Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos has given only a tiny fraction of his $160 billion fortune to philanthropic causes, falling far behind fellow billionaires such as Bill and Melinda Gates and former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, public records show.

Although Bezos, 55, and his estranged wife MacKenzie recently pledged $2 billion to a new charitable initiative, their previous giving amounts to a total of just over $145 million or .0906 percent — far less than one percent — of their net worth. Out of $100,000, that would be like spending $90.06 on charity.

“The record of both Amazon and Jeff Bezos reveals that they are takers, not givers,” said Queens City Councilman Jimmy Van Bramer, whose district includes Long Island City, where Amazon plans to set up a corporate headquarters. “When they make promises of how generous they will be, I look at what they have done in the past to know what the truth really is.”

Over nearly two decades, Jeff Bezos has given paltry donations to the Bezos Family Foundation, a charity that was started by his parents in Washington state in Sept. 2000, state incorporation filings show.

Between 2000 and 2017, Bezos contributed just under $6 million to the group that Jacklyn and Miguel Bezos kickstarted with $20,000. Ma and Pa Bezos, who were early investors in their son’s fledgling company in 1995, are worth as much as $30 billion today.

In 2004, Bezos, who had already amassed a net worth of just over $2 billion, joined the board of his parents’ non-profit, along with his wife and siblings Mark and Lisa and their respective partners, according to tax filings for the group reviewed by The Post.

But it was the parents who continued to finance the non-profit, mainly through donations of Amazon stock. In 2017, Jacklyn and Miguel Bezos contributed $30,266,250 in stock to their charity, public documents show. (The foundation makes donations to educational initiatives in the US and around the world.)

It wasn’t until 2011 that Jeff Bezos, whose wealth had shot up to more than $18 billion, finally gave his first contribution to the Bezos Family Foundation: $940,538 in Amazon stock through Zefram LLC, a company that he controls, federal filings show.

As his wealth climbed, Bezos continued to keep a tight rein on his cash, at least when it came to his family charity. In 2015, the year his wealth took a nearly $30 billion leap and his net worth shot up to $58.4 billion, the family foundation received a total of $5,002,590 in Amazon stock from Jeff and MacKenzie, public records show.

The $5,943,128 the tech titan donated to his parents’ charity over the last 17 years averages less than $350,000 annually.

Bezos has long been known for his stingy ways with employees at Amazon. According to Brad Stone’s 2013 book “The Everything Store,” meals in the company cafeterias are not subsidized for workers and new employees receive a backpack with orientation materials and various pieces of equipment, including a power adaptor, that they are asked to return upon resignation.

But in the last year Bezos seems to have opened his philanthropic spigot slightly. He took to Twitter to ask his 700,000 followers for suggestions on the direction his philanthropy should take, and he recently doled out $33 million to finance scholarships for undocumented immigrants who were brought to the US as children and $10 million to With Honor, a political action committee that helps veterans enter politics.

After announcing the creation of the Bezos Day One Fund, an initiative to battle homelessness and support early childhood education with the creation of Montessori schools in needy neighborhoods in September, Bezos earmarked $97.5 million to homeless charities across the country.

Still, the grand total of Bezos’s giving — $146,443,128 — is well below other major wealthy philanthropists, who signed on to billionaire investor Warren Buffett’s 2006 challenge to give half their fortune to philanthropy.

Read the whole story here.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0