Obama's $400,000 speech could prompt Congress to go after his pension

[toomuchtime_]

Then I guess if Congress takes away Obama's pension, the Supreme Court will have to rule on it if it doesn't consider the issue already settled by Calder v. Bull.

Cummings v. Missouri, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 277 (1866).and Flemnming v. Nestor, 363 U.S. 603, 619 (1960)[ override the restrictions of criminal only in Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. 386 (1798).

Same thing happened with Brown v. Board of Education 347 U.S. 483 (1954). Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 US 537 (1896)

Well, we'll just have to see what this Court will say.

 

[Markle]

hypocrites

George W. Bush's $15 Million Speech Payday

 

[radical right]

hypocrites

George W. Bush's $15 Million Speech Payday

Or Ronald Reagan getting two $1 million paydays for giving speeches in Japan. While receiving both a pension and social security.

 

[OKTexas]

Tell that to Vets that have had their pension terms changed after enlistment.

.

That's far different than having them changed AFTER they retire.

You're comparing apples, and androids.

Many did skippy. It happened under Clinton when they required military retirees and their spouses to enroll in medicare instead of just using CHAMPUS the military health care insurance, when they turned 65, it's called Tricare today.

.

 

[Care4all]

Last year, then-president Barack Obama vetoed a bill that would have curbed the pensions of former presidents if they took outside income of $400,000 or more.

So now that former president Barack Obama has decided to accept $400,000 for an upcoming Wall Street speech, the sponsors of that bill say they'll reintroduce that bill in hopes that President Trump will sign it.

"The Obama hypocrisy on this issue is revealing," said Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and sponsor of the 2016 bill. "His veto was very self-serving."

Chaffetz and Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, the sponsor of the companion Senate bill, say they will re-introduce the Presidential Allowance Modernization Act this month. The bill would cap presidential pensions at $200,000, with another $200,000 for expenses. But those payments would be reduced dollar-for-dollar once their outside income exceeds $400,000.

The issue isn't a partisan one — or at least, it wasn't last year. The bill passed both the House and Senate with no opposition, and no veto threat had come from the White House.


So when Obama's veto came one Friday night last July — on the last day for him to sign or veto the legislation — it took lawmakers by surprise. It was the 11th of Obama's 12 vetoes.

Obama's $400,000 speech could prompt Congress to go after his pension

Now this is a bill that will have bipartisan support.

the whole concept of limiting what a person can earn when they are a private citizen, is simply utterly ridiculous....R's refuse to cap CEO pay.....what hypocrites, no?

Regardless, even if they passed a bill, it can't be retroactive....when Obama retired and all other presidents still alive, they were owed a pension according to the laws on the books at the time of their hire.

The new law would only come in to effect with the next president...

Tell that to Vets that have had their pension terms changed after enlistment.

.

Well, I suppose if when they explain your benefits to you when hired and you have to read and sign all the paperwork, and there is a disclaimer that states the pension is subject to change or something of the sort, it could be done?

Robert Hansen, one of the most egregious spies we have had for the longest time, received his full pension...if memory serves....

you'd think Congress would have retroactively done something there if they would or could for anyone?

I understand the will behind this congressional effort, even more so now due to 'the love of money' Trump becoming President....

but it is inherently wrong to include older presidents who have retired already and getting only $150 k or $200k in pension which they use primarily for their small staff ....when their new found riches of making more than $400k a year could all be given to charity, or the $400 k the president gets is only for a couple of years....

Seems wrong to punish the success of any President, who has held the hardest job in the whole world....unless they did something horrific and criminal.

 

[radical right]

Many did skippy. It happened under Clinton when they required military retirees and their spouses to enroll in medicare instead of just using CHAMPUS the military health care insurance, when they turned 65, it's called Tricare today.

.

That was before they turned 65, I thought you said it was retroactive?

 

[radical right]

Seems wrong to punish the success of any President, who has held the hardest job in the whole world....unless they did something horrific and criminal.

Nixon got to keep his pension.

 

[Dschrute3]

I can see possibly paying to listen to Donald Trump speak. He's interesting and unpredictable. But paying to listen to Obama? No thanks. Way too boring and predictable.

 

[radical right]

I can see possibly paying to listen to Donald Trump speak. He's interesting and unpredictable. But paying to listen to Obama? No thanks. Way too boring and predictable.

s

You've never listened to a college lecture have you?

 

[OKTexas]

Last year, then-president Barack Obama vetoed a bill that would have curbed the pensions of former presidents if they took outside income of $400,000 or more.

So now that former president Barack Obama has decided to accept $400,000 for an upcoming Wall Street speech, the sponsors of that bill say they'll reintroduce that bill in hopes that President Trump will sign it.

"The Obama hypocrisy on this issue is revealing," said Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and sponsor of the 2016 bill. "His veto was very self-serving."

Chaffetz and Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, the sponsor of the companion Senate bill, say they will re-introduce the Presidential Allowance Modernization Act this month. The bill would cap presidential pensions at $200,000, with another $200,000 for expenses. But those payments would be reduced dollar-for-dollar once their outside income exceeds $400,000.

The issue isn't a partisan one — or at least, it wasn't last year. The bill passed both the House and Senate with no opposition, and no veto threat had come from the White House.


So when Obama's veto came one Friday night last July — on the last day for him to sign or veto the legislation — it took lawmakers by surprise. It was the 11th of Obama's 12 vetoes.

Obama's $400,000 speech could prompt Congress to go after his pension

Now this is a bill that will have bipartisan support.

the whole concept of limiting what a person can earn when they are a private citizen, is simply utterly ridiculous....R's refuse to cap CEO pay.....what hypocrites, no?

Regardless, even if they passed a bill, it can't be retroactive....when Obama retired and all other presidents still alive, they were owed a pension according to the laws on the books at the time of their hire.

The new law would only come in to effect with the next president...

Tell that to Vets that have had their pension terms changed after enlistment.

.

Well, I suppose if when they explain your benefits to you when hired and you have to read and sign all the paperwork, and there is a disclaimer that states the pension is subject to change or something of the sort, it could be done?

Robert Hansen, one of the most egregious spies we have had for the longest time, received his full pension...if memory serves....

you'd think Congress would have retroactively done something there if they would or could for anyone?

I understand the will behind this congressional effort, even more so now due to 'the love of money' Trump becoming President....

but it is inherently wrong to include older presidents who have retired already and getting only $150 k or $200k in pension which they use primarily for their small staff ....when their new found riches of making more than $400k a year could all be given to charity, or the $400 k the president gets is only for a couple of years....

Seems wrong to punish the success of any President, who has held the hardest job in the whole world....unless they did something horrific and criminal.

You need to be more specific when you use the name Robert Hanssen there were two that were prominent criminals, one a serial killer, the other a spy. The serial killer spelled his last name with one "s" the spy with two.

But to answer you question, no, he was not paid his pension, however his wife was allowed to retain survivor benefits as a condition of his plea agreement.

Published: Saturday, July 07, 2001
Hanssen will serve life in prison without chance of early release. The government does not object to his request to be assigned to a high-security penitentiary in Allenwood, Pa.

Hanssen must identify his assets and undergo a polygraph test about them. He will forfeit profits of his spying, set at about $1.44 million, and related property.

The government will pursue no other charges against Hanssen if he does not violate the agreement. If he does violate it, the government may prosecute him and seek the death penalty.

Sentencing was delayed for six months to ensure that Hanssen reveals details about his spying and the criminal activity of others.He could be required to testify before grand juries and at trials.

The FBI will review any information Hanssen plans to provide to be used in books, news articles or documentaries to ensure the information does not threaten national security. Neither Hanssen nor a Hanssen-designated family member may receive profits from publicity.

Hanssen forfeits his retirement pay, but his wife will be entitled to survivor benefits as long as she cooperates with authorities.

Source: U.S. District Court plea agreement, United States of America v. Robert Philip Hanssen

Details of FBI spy Robert Hanssen's plea agreement: | Lubbock Online | Lubbock Avalanche-Journal


.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Last year, then-president Barack Obama vetoed a bill that would have curbed the pensions of former presidents if they took outside income of $400,000 or more.

So now that former president Barack Obama has decided to accept $400,000 for an upcoming Wall Street speech, the sponsors of that bill say they'll reintroduce that bill in hopes that President Trump will sign it.

"The Obama hypocrisy on this issue is revealing," said Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and sponsor of the 2016 bill. "His veto was very self-serving."

Chaffetz and Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, the sponsor of the companion Senate bill, say they will re-introduce the Presidential Allowance Modernization Act this month. The bill would cap presidential pensions at $200,000, with another $200,000 for expenses. But those payments would be reduced dollar-for-dollar once their outside income exceeds $400,000.

The issue isn't a partisan one — or at least, it wasn't last year. The bill passed both the House and Senate with no opposition, and no veto threat had come from the White House.


So when Obama's veto came one Friday night last July — on the last day for him to sign or veto the legislation — it took lawmakers by surprise. It was the 11th of Obama's 12 vetoes.

Obama's $400,000 speech could prompt Congress to go after his pension

Now this is a bill that will have bipartisan support.

the whole concept of limiting what a person can earn when they are a private citizen, is simply utterly ridiculous....R's refuse to cap CEO pay.....what hypocrites, no?

Regardless, even if they passed a bill, it can't be retroactive....when Obama retired and all other presidents still alive, they were owed a pension according to the laws on the books at the time of their hire.

The new law would only come in to effect with the next president...

Tell that to Vets that have had their pension terms changed after enlistment.

.

Well, I suppose if when they explain your benefits to you when hired and you have to read and sign all the paperwork, and there is a disclaimer that states the pension is subject to change or something of the sort, it could be done?

Robert Hansen, one of the most egregious spies we have had for the longest time, received his full pension...if memory serves....

you'd think Congress would have retroactively done something there if they would or could for anyone?

I understand the will behind this congressional effort, even more so now due to 'the love of money' Trump becoming President....

but it is inherently wrong to include older presidents who have retired already and getting only $150 k or $200k in pension which they use primarily for their small staff ....when their new found riches of making more than $400k a year could all be given to charity, or the $400 k the president gets is only for a couple of years....

Seems wrong to punish the success of any President, who has held the hardest job in the whole world....unless they did something horrific and criminal.

You just described Obama's 8 years in office very accurately.

 

[OKTexas]

Many did skippy. It happened under Clinton when they required military retirees and their spouses to enroll in medicare instead of just using CHAMPUS the military health care insurance, when they turned 65, it's called Tricare today.

.

That was before they turned 65, I thought you said it was retroactive?

All retirees who had previously reached 65 were included.

.

 

[Markle]

Progressives simply want to push this foolish line so as to keep important topics off the front page.

If President Obama lives 50 years, he will collect $20 million. Double that for his security $40 million. Not even a rounding error.

Our annual budget is about $4 TRILLION a year. That means that the $40 million amounts to 0.001 of our budget.

In my opinion, anyone willing to subject themselves to that much abuse deserves a lifetime pension. At the same time, I believe we desperately need term limits for Congress. Congress was never intended as a career choice of a family dynasty.

 

[radical right]

Hanssen forfeits his retirement pay, but his wife will be entitled to survivor benefits as long as she cooperates with authorities.
.

While Hanssen sits in prison, his wife and six children will get the same survivor's benefits from his FBI pension that they would have gotten had he died as an honorable American. We're talking between $40,000 and $50,000 a year.

Editorial: A traitor's benefits | savannahnow.com | Savannah Morning News

 

[Dschrute3]

I can see possibly paying to listen to Donald Trump speak. He's interesting and unpredictable. But paying to listen to Obama? No thanks. Way too boring and predictable.

s

You've never listened to a college lecture have you?

I'll pass on paying to listen to most Politicians. Donald Trump and Ron Paul would be the only ones i would consider paying to listen to. Interesting folks.

 

[radical right]

That was before they turned 65, I thought you said it was retroactive?

All retirees who had previously reached 65 were included.

.

Citation?

 

[radical right]

Many did skippy. It happened under Clinton when they required military retirees and their spouses to enroll in medicare instead of just using CHAMPUS the military health care insurance, when they turned 65, it's called Tricare today.
.

All retirees who had previously reached 65 were included.
.

Citation?

Tricare (styled TRICARE), formerly known as the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS), is a health care program of the United States Department of Defense Military Health System.

 

[bodecea]

Maybe he should pay for his own damn security detail

because he's black?

because he's raking in money like a 1%'er

Because he's raking in money like white Presidents do......

He's uppity!

 

[OKTexas]

Hanssen forfeits his retirement pay, but his wife will be entitled to survivor benefits as long as she cooperates with authorities.
.

While Hanssen sits in prison, his wife and six children will get the same survivor's benefits from his FBI pension that they would have gotten had he died as an honorable American. We're talking between $40,000 and $50,000 a year.

Editorial: A traitor's benefits | savannahnow.com | Savannah Morning News

In reality survivor benefits are about half what the normal pension would be and it's reduced as the children become of age. His wife cooperated with the investigation and helped to identify assets that the government seized. She is also prohibited from making future monies on books or other publicity around the case. His children were totally innocent, aren't you regressive all for taking care of the children?


.

 

[radical right]

In reality survivor benefits are about half what the normal pension would be and it's reduced as the children become of age. His wife cooperated with the investigation and helped to identify assets that the government seized. She is also prohibited from making future monies on books or other publicity around the case. His children were totally innocent, aren't you regressive all for taking care of the children?
.

She shouldn't be getting "survivors" benefits until Hanssen is put to death, or dies of natural causes. Why is she getting paid while her husband is still alive?