Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

REPORT: Here’s How Obama Helped Dem Congressman Doubled His Wealth While In Congress

Published

on

One of the richest members of Congress is also the Democratic nominee attempting to become governor of Colorado. His name is Jared Polis and he doubled his wealth in just 10 years while he was in the House of Representatives. This is based on a benchmark estimation and some of his wealth reportedly came during the eight years that former President Barack Obama was in office.

The irony is how there are so many rich Democrats while their voters are also some of the poorest people in America. If there’s a perfect example of division in this country, it’s how vastly different the pockets and bank accounts are between the highest paid Democrats and the lowest paid Democrat voters.

Polis is just one of many extremely wealthy Democrats. There are rich people on all sides, but it often strikes a nerve when people who pander to the poor are often so rich that it’s impossible for them to physically count all of their money.

Todd Sheppard of the Washington Free Beacon tells us more: “Jared Polis, one of the 10 richest members of Congress and the Democratic nominee for governor of Colorado, saw his wealth double during his 10-year run in the House of Representatives according to one benchmark estimation, and the congressman had the ability to actively manage the vast majority of his wealth in that time despite boasting about creating a blind trust “to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.”

Trending: James Comey Just Caught In Major New Scandal – Hillary Would Be Proud!

The congressman’s net worth hovered around $140 to $170 million dollars between 2007 to 2010, according to an analysis of financial disclosures by the Center for Responsive Politics. By 2014, his wealth spiked to about $387 million.

Those figures are only an estimate, however, as congressional disclosure forms only require the elected official to list an asset within specified ranges of value. However, because the CRP is a clearinghouse for all kinds of public information on members of Congress, which includes parsing and estimating financial data from disclosures, and because their methodology is applied consistently, their estimates are often used as a baseline standard by politicians, candidates, and journalists.

Disclosures from the earliest years after Polis took office created controversy in 2012 when conservative political author Peter Schweizer published a book that included a section critical of some of Polis’s health care investments, given that the congressman ultimately voted “yes” for the Affordable Care Act despite initially casting a “no” vote in committee when the bill was in its earliest forms.

Polis co-founded the private company BridgeHealth Medical in Colorado, which in its early days was a pioneer in what’s known as “medical tourism,” whereby patients—with the help of a company like BridgeHealth—could find lower surgery costs in places such as India or Costa Rica.

Because much of Polis’s activity with BridgeHealth came in the years leading up to the passage of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, Schweizer called it “[o]ne of the more creative and cynical plays on health care reform.” He wrote:

In other words, Polis was betting that there would be more, not less, medical tourism after the passage of health care reform. Companies in the medical tourism industry generally agreed, and favored Obamacare. They did not believe the bill would actually contain costs, and if anything, they expected overseas medical procedures to become more attractive. Medical Tourism magazine featured an article after the passage of the bill entitled, “Medical Tourism Expands as Alternative to Obama- care.” As the article put it, “Interest in medical tourism has expanded rapidly as Americans react to the new federal law.”

As the controversy developed, two D.C.-based ethics watchdogs were also critical of the investments.

Polis has fired back after an excerpt of Schweizer’s book was published in the Denver Post.

“The fact is I have not purchased stock in any publicly traded company since entering Congress,” he wrote in a rebuttal op-ed. “[Schweizer’s] assertions are blatantly and verifiably false. Additionally, when I was first elected in 2008, I decided to set up a blind trust to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, a step few members take and that is not required.”

A summary of the 2015 disclosures shows Polis listing assets for a blind trust in the range of $25 to $50 million. However, based on estimates from the Center for Responsive Politics, Polis had at least four other assets listed in the same monetary range, making it a reasonable estimate that his blind trust only represented between 10 and 30 percent of his overall wealth. And his investments in BridgeHealth, which have continued well into 2015, have never been in the blind trust.

The Washington Free Beacon asked Polis and his campaign if restricting his investments to strictly private companies, which BridgeHealth is, presented a more ethical option than investing in public companies. No comment was provided to that question and several others.

The Boulder-based congressman emphasized in 2012 that his investments into BridgeHealth were loans.

“I have loaned this business money virtually every quarter since its founding in order to sustain its operations and to avoid layoffs,” the congressman wrote. “I am not otherwise involved in this company as either an employee or board member.”

Many of the BridgeHealth transactions documented by Polis in his disclosures list them as “Convertible Notes Receivable.”

“A convertible note is an investment vehicle often used by seed investors investing in startups who wish to delay establishing a valuation for that startup until a later round of funding or milestone,” according to FundersClub.com. “Convertible notes are structured as loans with the intention of converting to equity. The outstanding balance of the loan is automatically converted to equity at a specific milestone, often at the valuation of a later funding round. In order to compensate the angel investor for the additional risk of investing in the earlier round, convertible notes will sometimes have additional clauses, such as caps, and or discounts.”

According to 2015 disclosures—the last year for which CRP aggregated, estimated, and sorted all of the financial information for the congressman—Polis had an equity position in BridgeHealth somewhere between $5 and $25 million, and he had “note/note receivable” positions in the company for the same asset range.

Polis built his wealth at an early age through entrepreneurial endeavors, most of them technology related, and has used his wealth to self-finance most of his political ambitions. He is currently sponsoring a bill that would reverse the tax cuts from the 2017 bill passed mainly by the GOP in party-line votes.

He’s also well known in Colorado as one of the so-called “Gang of Four”—four multi-millionaires who donated heavily to create a Democrat-based advocacy structure of non-profits and media organizations that remained outside of the reach of the party itself. It’s generally accepted that the results of the “blueprint” by the Gang of Four showed enormous success between the years 2004 and 2006, when Democrats began taking back majorities in the state general assembly and winning back the governor’s chair. After those successes, Democrats at both the national and state levels began duplicating many of the strategies Polis and the others had invented and deployed.”

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Trending Now on Right Wing News


Well Look What Ocasio-Cortez Was Hiding While Saying She Can’t Afford D.C. Apartment

Published

on

...

* By

As the most reliable and balanced news aggregation service in the world, RWN offers the following information published by: Daily Caller

A Fox News report released Tuesday says that Congresswoman-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez likely has “more than enough” money to afford a Washington D.C. apartment.

“I have three months without a salary before I’m a member of Congress, so how do I get an apartment?” Ocasio-Cortez told The New York Times last week. “Those little things are very real.”

The Fox News report shows that Ocasio-Cortez — a Democratic Socialist who ran to the left of and defeated long-term Democratic incumbent Joe Crowley in New York’s 14th Congressional District — “reported having between $15,001 and $50,000 in her checking account as of the end of April 2018, according to a Financial Disclosure Report she submitted to the clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives.”

That appears to be much more than the average household.

She also disclosed a financial investment account worth between $1,001 and $15,000.

Further, the incoming lawmaker has reportedly drawn $6,200 in salary from her campaign since August, the last reported withdrawal being $1,288.96 just three weeks before the election.

It’s certainly possible that Ocasio-Cortez spent the substantial amount of money she had on hand during the three months between April and when she began drawing from her campaign on necessary expenses. But if not, with a median rent of $2,700 in Washington D.C., housing shouldn’t be an issue between now and when she begins receiving her $174,000 annual salary next year.

As further evidence that Ocasio-Cortez is nothing but a socialist puppet or attention-seeking person, is that he proved she has no answers or ideas on how socialism works and who will pay for all of this free healthcare. Coming from a woman who can’t even plan for or manage to pay her rent, it all makes sense.

We previously reported her response when asked about expensive ‘Medicare for All’ plan:

Democratic New York congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is still struggling to explain how she expects to pay for her expensive “Medicare for All” plan.

[WATCH: Relevant part starts at around the 7:00 mark]

Ocasio-Cortez, who upset incumbent Rep. Joe Crowley in the Democratic primary, has repeatedly been unable to answer how she will pay for her socialistic policies. A study by the George Mason University Mercatus Center claims Medicare for All would cost $32.6 trillion in government spending over 10 years.

During an interview with Jorge Ramos last Thursday, Ocasio-Cortez said she is “puzzled” that people keep asking her how the country can afford socialized medicine.

“People often say, like, ‘how are you going to pay for it?’ And I find the question so puzzling, because, how do you pay for something that’s more affordable?” Ocasio-Cortez said.

Ocasio-Cortez’s claim that Medicare for All would be cheaper than the current health system is inaccurate. While the Mercatus Center study estimated drug prices would fall under Medicare for All, higher demand would still significantly drive up costs.

“How do you pay for cheaper rent?” she said. “You just pay for it. You’re paying more now!”

Do YOU think we have the best President and First Lady ever? Follow Amanda Shea on Twitter to get RIGHT daily insight!

Continue Reading

Here’s What Just Happened To The Number Of Incoming Dems Supporting Trump Impeachment

Published

on

And just like the right was predicting all along it’s starting to look like a very small number of newly elected House Democrats are actually putting impeachment at the top of their agenda. Even after all the noise, they made these past two years where they accused President Trump of every criminal act they could dream of.

Here is more via The Daily Caller:

“The number of newly elected Democrats in the House of Representatives who are putting immediate impeachment at the top of their agenda is surprisingly small for the level of chatter the subject has received since Donald Trump became president, according to an analysis of their statements.

As the freshmen class of House Democrats heads to Capitol Hill for orientation, an analysis from The Washington Post revealed Tuesday that only 11, or 21 percent, have said they want to immediately begin the impeachment process for Trump.

Thirteen Democratic freshmen oppose the move despite the loud impeachment calls early on in his presidency by Democrats.

The largest chunk of the cohort, 17 individuals or 33 percent, said they’d prefer to wait until special counsel Robert Mueller releases his team’s report on the Russia investigation before deciding to move forward with impeachment.

The remaining 11 Democratic House freshmen have not commented or made strong arguments either way, according to the analysis. (RELATED: A Record Number Of Women Ran For Office, But Did They Win?)

While it is unknown when Mueller will release his findings on whether Trump or his circle had any involvement in Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, top Democrats have used the report as a point of contingency, and in turn have slowed down impeachment talks in recent weeks.

Former Vice President Joe Biden said he hopes Democrats wait until the Mueller report is out before moving forward with impeachment in an Oct. 18 interview with CBS.

“I hope they don’t. I don’t think there’s a basis for doing that right now,” Biden, a current Democratic favorite for a potential bid to the 2020 presidency, said. “There are so many things to attend to immediately. Let’s see where the investigation takes us.”

House Minority Leader and potential Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi took a slightly different approach in a Sunday interview with The Atlantic, saying that while she doesn’t want to impeach Trump, the Mueller probe will not define that decision.

“Recognize one point,” Pelosi said. “What Mueller might not think is indictable could be impeachable.”

A Politico/Morning Consult poll released Monday revealed the majority of Americans, 51 percent of voters, don’t support impeachment either.

While a little more than half of overall voters say the Democratic-controlled House should not begin the impeachment process for Trump, the majority of Democrats, 61 percent, want Congress to begin the proceedings in 2019.”

Could this be because they really do know all this rhetoric was only so they could gain power again and nothing else?

Good luck explaining this to the far left wing “mob” you all created!

Continue Reading




Latest Articles

Become an insider!

Thank you for your interest in receiving the Right Wing News newsletter. To subscribe, please submit your email address below.

Send this to a friend