Obamacare Premiums to Rise Almost 25% and Some Consumers Down to One Insurer … What Happened to the $2500 Premium Reduction?

HOW THAT “UNAFFORDABLE” AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE ACT WORKING OUT FOR YOU AMERICA?

As stated at Town Hall, just days after Barack Obama gave Obamacare a ringing endorsement, it is now confirmed that consumers will be feeling the wrath of Obamacare premiums rising as much as 25%. As reported by the AP, as per the administration, Obamacare premiums will go up sharply next year under President Barack Obama’s health care law, and many consumers will be down to just one insurer. According to CNN, the average premium increase masks wide variation among the states. In Arizona, the benchmark plan’s average premium will increase 116% in 2017. Remember this when you go to the polls America. I can’t say we did not warn you and tell you this from day one. You were lied to America by the current president, do we really want 4 more years of Democrat lies?

Remember when this liar told you Obamacare would reduce your premiums up to $2500 a year?

Premiums will go up sharply next year under President Barack Obama’s health care law, and many consumers will be down to just one insurer, the administration confirmed Monday. That’s sure to stoke another “Obamacare” controversy days before a presidential election.

Before taxpayer-provided subsidies, premiums for a midlevel benchmark plan will increase an average of 25 percent across the 39 states served by the federally run online market, according to a report from the Department of Health and Human Services. Some states will see much bigger jumps, others less.

Moreover, about 1 in 5 consumers will only have plans from a single insurer to pick from, after major national carriers such as UnitedHealth Group, Humana and Aetna scaled back their roles.

“Consumers will be faced this year with not only big premium increases but also with a declining number of insurers participating, and that will lead to a tumultuous open enrollment period,” said Larry Levitt, who tracks the health care law for the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. [...]

In some states, the premium increases are striking. In Arizona, unsubsidized premiums for a hypothetical 27-year-old buying a benchmark “second-lowest cost silver plan” will jump by 116 percent, from $196 to $422, according to the administration report. [...]

Dwindling choice is another issue.

The total number of HealthCare.gov insurers will drop from 232 this year to 167 in 2017, a loss of 28 percent. (Insurers are counted multiple times if they offer coverage in more than one state. So Aetna, for example, would count once in each state that it participated in.)

Judicial Watch Releases New Hillary Clinton Email Answers Given under Oath and She Can’t Recall Anything

UNBELIEVABLE … HILLARY CLINTON’S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES IS SHE CAN’T RECALL ANYTHING.

Judicial Watch has released Hillary Clinton’s written responses under oath to their court ordered interrogatories by U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan and the answers are typical Clintonian nonsense and a disgrace. The former Secretary of State and current Democrat nominee for president seems to have forgot everything. I am beginning to wonder if she could recall her name. So what seems to be the problem with Hillary Clinton, does she have no short term memory, no long term memory, or is she just a lying and deceptive sack of sh*t? America, do you want to wake up one day to Hillary saying, I don’t recall that I took away the Second Amendment and America’s liberties?

AMERICA, WAKE THE HELL UP AND UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON! WE ARE ALL BEING PLAYED BY THE CLINTON’S, THE DEMOCRAT PARTY AND THE MSM. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. DO NOT REWARD THIS LIAR WITH THE PRESIDENCY.

What difference does it make that I can’t recall, the MSM will never report on it, they are in my pocket

RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES

1) Describe the creation of the clintonemail.com system, including who decided to create the system, the date it was decided to create the system, why it was created, who set it up, and when it became operational.

Response: Secretary Clinton objects to Interrogatory No. 1 as outside the scope of permitted discovery. The clintonemail.com system, as that term is defined in the Instructions and subject to Secretary Clinton’s objection to that definition, consisted of equipment set up to host e-mail for President Clinton’s staff. Information regarding the creation of that system, including the reasons for its creation, is irrelevant to this lawsuit and outside the scope of permitted discovery. The Court permitted discovery in this case on the question of “the purpose for the creation and operation of the clintonemail.com system for State Department business.” Dkt. #124, at 17 (emphasis added). That question is the subject of Interrogatory No. 2, which is answered below.

2) Describe the creation of your clintonemail.com email account, including who decided to create it, when it was created, why it was created, and, if you did not set up the account yourself, who set it up for you.

Response: In the Senate, when Secretary Clinton began using e-mail, she used a personal e-mail account for both work-related and personal e-mail. Secretary Clinton decided to transition from the account she used in her tenure at the Senate to the clintonemail.com account. She recalls that it was created in early 2009. Secretary Clinton did not set up the account. Although Secretary Clinton does not have specific knowledge of the details of the account’s creation, her best understanding is that one of President Clinton’s aides, Justin Cooper, set up the account. She decided to use a clintonemail.com account for the purpose of convenience.

3) When did you decide to use a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business and whom did you consult in making this decision?

Response: Secretary Clinton recalls deciding to use a clintonemail.com e-mail account to conduct official State Department business in early 2009. She does not recall any specific consultations regarding the decision to use the clintonemail.com account for official State Department business.

4) Identify all communications in which you participated concerning or relating to your decision to use a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business and, for each communication, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the communication.

Response: Secretary Clinton objects to Interrogatory No. 4 insofar as it purports to request information about communications after her tenure as Secretary of State, which communications would be irrelevant to the purpose for the creation and operation of her clintonemail.com account while she was Secretary of State. Subject to the foregoing objection, Secretary Clinton states that she does not recall participating in any communications before or during her tenure as Secretary of State concerning or relating to her decision to use a clintonemail.com account to conduct official State Department business.

5) In a 60 Minutes interview aired on July 24, 2016, you stated that it was “recommended” you use a personal email account to conduct official State Department business. What recommendations were you given about using or not using a personal email account to conduct official State Department business, who made any such recommendations, and when were any such recommendations made?

Response: Secretary Clinton objects to Interrogatory No. 5 insofar as it misstates her comments in the 60 Minutes interview that aired on July 24, 2016. In that interview, she stated that “it was recommended that [using personal e-mail] would be convenient.” Subject to that objection, Secretary Clinton states that former Secretary of State Colin Powell advised her in 2009 about his use of a personal e-mail account to conduct official State Department business.

6) Were you ever advised, cautioned, or warned, was it ever suggested, or did you ever participate in any communication, conversation, or meeting in which it was discussed that your use of a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business conflicted with or violated federal recordkeeping laws. For each instance in which you were so advised, cautioned or warned, in which such a suggestion was made, or in which such a discussion took place, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the advice, caution, warning, suggestion, or discussion.

Response: Secretary Clinton objects to Interrogatory No. 6 on the ground that it requests information that is not within the scope of permitted discovery for the reason set forth in General Objection No. 5. Secretary Clinton further objects to Interrogatory No. 6 to the extent it requests information about communications made to other persons that were not conveyed to Secretary Clinton. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Secretary Clinton states that she does not recall being advised, cautioned, or warned, she does not recall that it was ever suggested to her, and she does not recall participating in any communication, conversation, or meeting in which it was discussed that her use of a clintonemail.com e-mail account to conduct official State Department business conflicted with or violated federal recordkeeping laws.

7) Your campaign website states, “When Clinton got to the Department, she opted to use her personal email account as a matter of convenience.” What factors other than convenience did you consider in deciding to use a personal email account to conduct official State Department business? Include in your answer whether you considered federal records management and preservation requirements and how email you used to conduct official State Department business would be searched in response to FOIA requests.

Response: Secretary Clinton objects to Interrogatory No. 7 on the ground that it requests information that is not within the scope of permitted discovery for the reason set forth in General Objection No. 5. Subject to and without waiving that objection, Secretary Clinton states that she does not recall considering factors other than convenience in deciding to use a personal e-mail account to conduct official State Department business.

Read more

Donald Trump at Debate: Hillary You Are No Abraham Lincoln. You are a Liar (VIDEO)

From the 2nd Presidential Debate … Another amazing line from Trump that left Hillary Clinton shell-shocked, wobbling and if this was a prize fight she would have been given a standing 8 count …

Donald Trump eviscerated Hillary Clinton during the second debate. One of the most telling moments was when Hillary blamed her lies on having two different public and private views as witnessed from her WikiLeaked Wallstreet business transcripts on Honest Abe. That is correct. How the hell does anyone go down that rabbit hole?

Trump ponced on that opportunity and ad libbed the following political gold … “Honest Abe never lied. That’s the big difference between Abraham Lincoln and you” as he pointed directly at Hillary Clinton. OUCH!!! The look on Hillary’s face was priceless. She knew she walked into a trap and was nailed.

#Lying Crooked Hillary: Debate Moderators Let Hillary Slide When Her ‘Syrian Red Line’ Fact Check Claims Turned Out to be False

EVEN UPON FACT CHECKING OF TRUMP’S COMMENT … HILLARY CLINTON IS A LIAR!!!

Make no mistake about it America, Hillary Clinton is a liar. She has been, is currently and forever will be incapable of telling the truth. Why, because no one holds her accountable or to any standard. Take the second 2016 Presidential debate where even the moderators refused to call her out on her lie. During the debate, Donald trump stated that Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State when President Barack Obama drew the dubious and so-called Syrian “line in the sand” ultimatum.  However, Clinton was quick to say that it needed to be fact checked and go to her website, where of course one could get a bunch of Hillary Clinton mind-dumb, Kool-Aid drinking zombies lying for Hillary. Guess what, according to actual Fact Checking, Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State when Obama drew the co-called line. But guess what, the moderators sat on their hands and said nothing, even Martha Raddatz who is supposed to be a Middle East expert and knew damn well that Clinton was Secretary of State when the comment was made. But she certainly had no problem confronting and at times debating Donald Trump during the debate. Hmm, imagine that?

Is this what you want America, the most dishonest and corrupt candidate ever to run for the Oval Office to be President of the United States?

Politifact weighed in, calling the statement “mostly false” based on the following timeline:

• August, 2012: President Obama makes the “red line” comment for the first time.
• December, 2012: Secretary of State Clinton reiterates the term at a summit in Prague, amid rumors that Assad is moving chemical weapons in preparation for attacks.
• January, 2013: Secretary of State Clinton brings up the “red line” again, this time in an interview.
• February, 2013: Clinton steps down as Secretary of State.
• August, 2013: White House announces that they have “assessed with high confidence” that Syria has used chemical weapons, crossing the “red line.”

Pew Poll: Most Americans Don’t Believe in ‘Scientific Consensus’ on Climate Change

MOST AMERICANS DON’T BELIEVE IN SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND DON’T TRUST THE MEDIA REPORTING ON IT …

Is it a consensus if most Americans do not believe the “scientific consensus on climate change? As reported at CNS News, most Americans do not agree and believe the “scientific consensus” on climate change. Fifty-one percent of U.S. adults say climate change is either that the Earth’s warming stems from natural causes or that there is no evidence of warming. So much for the 97% consensus. I guess, according to Leonardo Di Caprio, more than hold of Americans shouldn’t hold public officer. Hey Leo, in my humble opinion, shut up and just act.

Hmm, climate change. What ever happened to global warming?

Nearly three-quarters of Americans don’t trust that there is a large “scientific consensus” amongst climate scientists on human behavior being the cause of climate change, according to an in-depth survey on “the politics of climate” released Tuesday by Pew Research Center.

According to the survey, only 27 percent of Americans agree that “almost all” climate scientists say that human behavior is mostly responsible for climate change, while 35 percent say that “more than half” of climate scientists agree on this. An additional 35 percent of those surveyed say that fewer than half (20%) or almost no (15%) climate scientists believe that human behavior is the main contributing factor in climate change.

Pew contrasted this to the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which “stated in the forward to its 2013 report, ‘the science now shows with 95 percent certainty that human activity is the dominant cause of observed warming since the mid-20th century.’”

Additionally, Americans were skeptical about the expertise of climate scientists.

Just 33 percent of those surveyed said that climate scientists understand “very well” whether global climate change is happening, another 39 percent said climate scientists understand this “fairly well.” Twenty-seven percent of those surveyed say climate scientists don’t understand this “too well” or don’t understand it at all.

When it comes to the causes of global climate change only 28 percent say climate scientists understand them “very well” while 31 percent say the scientists understand them “not too well” or “not at all.”

Additionally, Americans seemed to lack trust in climate scientists’ solutions to climate change. Only 19 percent say climate scientists understand very well the best ways to address climate change, and 35 percent say the scientists understand this not too well or not at all.

Americans also don’t trust the news media’s coverage of climate change. Forty-seven percent of those surveyed say the media does a “good job” covering global climate change, while 51% say they do a “bad job.”