Attention

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent our advertisers

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Pigford vs Glickman

"In 1997, 400 African-American farmers sued the United States Department of Agriculture, alleging that they had been unfairly denied USDA loans due to racial discrimination during the period 1983 to 1997."
  
The case was entitled "Pigford vs. Glickman" and in 1999, the black farmers
won their case. The government agreed to pay each of them as much as $50,000 to settle their claims.

But then on February 23, 2010, something shocking happened in relation to that
original judgment:  In total silence, the USDA agreed to release more funds to "Pigford".
  
The amount was a staggering...... $1.25 billion.  This was because the original
number of plaintiffs - 400 black farmers had now swollen, in a class action suit, to include a total of 86,000 black farmers throughout America .

There was only one teensy problem:   

The United States of America doesn't have 86,000 black farmers!!!!
  
According to accurate and totally verifiable Official USDA 2007 Census census
data, the total number of black farmers throughout America   is only 39,697. 
 
Hmmm... by the Official USDA 1992 Census data the US had only 18,816 black
farmers!! Oops!!
  
Well, gosh - how on earth did 39,697 explode into the fraudulent 86,000 claims??    

And how did $50,000 explode into $1.25 billion??
  
Well, folks, you'll just have to ask the woman who not only spearheaded this case
because of her position in 1997 at the "Rural Development Leadership Network", but whose family received the highest single payout  (approximately $13 million) from that action -  Shirley Sherrod. Oops again!!
  
Yes, folks it appears that Ms. Sherrod had just unwittingly exposed herself as the
perpetrator of one of the biggest fraud claims in the history of the United States   - a fraud enabled solely because she screamed racism at the government and cowed them into submission.   And it gets even more interesting...
Ms. Sherrod has also exposed the person who aided and abetted her in this race
fraud.  As it turns out, the original judgment of  "Pigford vs. Glickman" in 1999 only applied to a total of about 16,000 black farmers.
But....in 2008, a junior US Senator got a law passed to reopen the case and allow
more black farmers to sue for funds.
  
The Senator was Barack Hussein Obama.

Because this law was passed in dead silence, and because the woman responsible
for spearheading it was an obscure USDA official,  American taxpayers did not realize that they had just been forced in the midst of a worldwide recession to pay out more than $1.25 billion to settle a race claim.

But Andy Breitbart knew.  And on Monday, July 22, 2010, he cleverly laid a trap
which Sherrod  - -  and Obama + his  cronies  - -  stumbled headfirst into which has now resulted in the entire world discovering the existence of this corrupt financial judgment.  As for Ms. Sherrod??  Well, she's discovering too late that her cry of 'racism' to the media which was intended to throw the spotlight on Breitbart has instead thrown that spotlight on herself and the huge corruption.     Sherrod has vanished from public view.    
  
But the perpetrator of that law passed in dead silence leading to unlawful claims &
corruption..... is still trying to fool all of US.
  
Go to Google and read for yourself "Pigford vs. Glickman", or "Pigford Obama".

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

You lie to begin with by saying "law passed in the dead of silence". This case has been ongoing and reported on for years. Therefore the credibility on the other points is shot and not really worth factchecking.

G. A. Harrison said...

Anon 1008 -

That is one of the saddest arguments that I have ever come across:

I find one error in an argument's evidence, therefore it is valid to infer that the other evidence isn't true.

Give me a break!

I have no idea whether the argument put forward in the post is valid or not. I have no idea whether the evidence is true or not. If I cared enough, I would research it and find out. However, your version of inferential logic defies every rule put forward from Aristotle to today.

Anonymous said...

Reparations and guaranteed Democrat voters for life. Only they are too stupid to realise they are still enslaved on the Democrat Plantation.

Anonymous said...

GA, try selling that argument to the average judge or juror