Jump to content



Photo

Hillary Clinton


  • Please log in to reply
1269 replies to this topic

#21 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 24 April 2015 - 11:28 PM

I agree that it's time to take a closer look... 

 

Unraveling: Liberal Common Cause demands Clinton Foundation, Hillary audit

 

The financial issues plaguing Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign have become too much even for liberal groups, and now Common Cause is calling for an independent audit of donations to the Clinton Foundation.

 

"Six years ago, at Mrs. Clinton's confirmation hearing for her appointment as secretary of state, then-Sen. Dick Lugar observed that 'that foreign governments and entities may perceive the Clinton Foundation as a means to gain favor with the secretary of state.' He was right, and his remarks remain relevant today as Mrs. Clinton seeks the presidency," said Common Cause President Miles Rapoport.

 

http://www.washingto...article/2563565



#22 Savile Row

Savile Row

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,922 posts

Posted 25 April 2015 - 06:28 AM

Mitt Romney says Clinton was ‘bribed’ as secretary of state
By Laura Italiano
April 25, 2015
http://nypost.com/20...etary-of-state/

Millions in foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation make it look like Hillary Clinton “was bribed,” while serving as secretary of state, Mitt Romney said in a pointed jab at the Democratic presidential candidate.

“You know, I’ve got to tell you, I was stunned by it. I mean, it looks like bribery,” the former Republican presidential nominee said in an appearance on the Hugh Hewitt radio show Thursday night.

“I mean, there is every appearance that Hillary Clinton was bribed to grease the sale of, what, 20 percent of American’s uranium production to Russia, and then, it was covered up by lying about a meeting at her home with the principals, and by erasing e-mails,” he said.


Edited by Savile Row, 25 April 2015 - 06:39 AM.


#23 Savile Row

Savile Row

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,922 posts

Posted 25 April 2015 - 06:29 AM

He called on the Clintons to release their tax returns.

https://thenypost.fi...20&h=480&crop=1



#24 Savile Row

Savile Row

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,922 posts

Posted 25 April 2015 - 06:34 AM

Understanding the influence-peddling of Clinton Inc.
By Jonah Goldberg
April 23, 2015
http://nypost.com/20...of-clinton-inc/



A Canadian business wanted to sell its uranium mines in Kazakhstan and the United States to a Russian state-run — i.e., Vladimir Putin-run — firm.

I know what you’re thinking: What could go wrong?

In order to grease the skids — allegedly, of course — Canadian uranium moguls Frank Giustra and Ian Telfer gave millions to the Clinton Foundation and arranged for a $500,000 speech by Bill Clinton (whose speaking fees mysteriously skyrocketed after his wife became secretary of state), bankrolled by a Russian investment bank with interests in the deal.









 


Edited by Savile Row, 25 April 2015 - 06:37 AM.


#25 Savile Row

Savile Row

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,922 posts

Posted 25 April 2015 - 04:25 PM

Hillary’s trade-deal flip-flop angered fellow Democrats
By Geoff Earl
4-25-2015
WASHINGTON — Hillary Rodham Clinton’s rationale for flip-flopping to support a contentious Colombian free-trade agreement in 2009 was rejected by most Democrats in Congress, who voted against it, records show.

Trying to fend off critics who charge her change of heart came after millions flowed into the Clinton Foundation, the former secretary of state insisted she shifted only because Colombia agreed to substantive changes in its treatment of trade unionists.

In 2008, she cited a shocking level of violence, including murder, against union activists in opposing the deal.
 
“It doesn’t matter who talks to me,” Clinton said that year. “It doesn’t matter any circumstances. I have been against it. I am against it. I will be against it absent the kind of changes in behavior that I have been calling for from the Colombian government.”




http://nypost.com/20...llow-democrats/



#26 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 27 April 2015 - 08:17 AM

This is much worse than I even imagined... other than the obvious pay to play deal which may be criminal... this so called "charity" organization is simply a slush fund so that the Clinton's can travel first class and funnel reward money to friends and supporters... these thieves took in 140 million... while only providing 9 million in charity aid...

 

Let's see... that's 6.4%... only 6.4% of this massive amount of wealth goes to charity aid... 93.6% goes to maintain the Clinton's lifestyle as the top 1% of the top 1%...

 

However... the services provided to foreign heads of state, foreign governments and other entities are priceless... 

 

The Clinton Foundation’s finances are so messy that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put it on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits last month.
 
The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.
 
The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.
 


#27 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 27 April 2015 - 08:47 AM

But, Q, that can't be right! The Clinton's are the salt of the earth. They were dead broke just a few years ago. They spend all their time and energy helping the poor!
  • Quasar, CityBoy, Tina and 2 others like this

#28 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 27 April 2015 - 09:40 AM

Is this the same Clinton Foundation that spends 88.4% of their money on programs, 7% on management and 4.6% on fundraising?   How could the Federalist have it so wrong?



#29 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 27 April 2015 - 10:00 AM

Is this the same Clinton Foundation that spends 88.4% of their money on programs, 7% on management and 4.6% on fundraising?   How could the Federalist have it so wrong?


Dunno... but when you've got top democrats and neutral watch dog groups saying that it's a slush fund... they've got a big problem here...

#30 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 27 April 2015 - 11:19 AM

Dunno... but when you've got top democrats and neutral watch dog groups saying that it's a slush fund... they've got a big problem here..

 

haven't heard of any top democrats or neutral watch dog groups saying that.



#31 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 27 April 2015 - 03:02 PM

haven't heard of any top democrats or neutral watch dog groups saying that.

 

Well... now you have...  :thumbsup:

 

http://www.washingto...ail-agenda-que/

 

http://www.americant...watch_list.html



#32 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 06 May 2015 - 08:53 AM

This would be amusing... if it wasn't such a serious matter... 

 

At a Clinton Global Initiative event in Marrakesh, former President Bill Clinton was asked why he isn't defending the Clinton Foundation from increased scrutiny. "I just work here," Clinton replied. "I don't know."

 

http://www.weeklysta...now_939951.html

 

 



#33 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 09 May 2015 - 12:42 PM

From those right wing nuts at Salon:

"The Realities of 2016
Hillary Clinton is, of course, not her husband. But her access to his past banker alliances, amplified by the ones that she has formed herself, makes her more of a friend than an adversary to the banking industry. In her brief 2008 candidacy, all four of the New York-based Big Six banks ranked among her top 10 corporate donors. They have also contributed to the Clinton Foundation. She needs them to win, just as both Barack Obama and Bill Clinton did.
No matter what spin is used for campaigning purposes, the idea that a critical distance can be maintained between the White House and Wall Street is naïve given the multiple channels of money and favors that flow between the two. It is even more improbable, given the history of connections that Hillary Clinton has established through her associations with key bank leaders in the early 1990s, during her time as a senator from New York, and given their contributions to the Clinton foundation while she was secretary of state. At some level, the situation couldn’t be less complicated: her path aligns with that of the country’s most powerful bankers. If she becomes president, that will remain the case."

http://www.salon.com...idency_partner/
  • CityBoy likes this

#34 CityBoy

CityBoy

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 973 posts

Posted 09 May 2015 - 01:59 PM

Her hypocrisy is exceeded only by her arrogance.
  • kelley and Tina like this

#35 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 09 May 2015 - 02:13 PM

And more...this from a site I've known liberal academics to highly recommend.

This is the chick that will save the little people from Walmart, lol.

http://www.vox.com/2...on-donors-State

Edited by kelley, 09 May 2015 - 02:14 PM.


#36 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 09 May 2015 - 02:30 PM

In conclusion: liberals should show some integrity and support Bernie. Hillary is an elitist corporate and bankster shill, and if that isn't obvious by now, the ignorance is intentional.
  • CityBoy likes this

#37 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 11 May 2015 - 10:28 AM

Oh now...

I do support Bernie... he's an awesome progressive, but he will never be President of the United States.  Hillary... maybe she will be pulled to the left some, wouldn't hurt...  And, if by chance in hell Bernie is the Dem nominee I will support him for sure.


  • Donna likes this

#38 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 11 May 2015 - 10:35 AM

I do support Bernie... he's an awesome progressive, but he will never be President of the United States.



Why not? What forces prevent that but will allow a Hillary win?

The same types of things were said about Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. Before Bernie, people were saying "'They' will never 'let' him be the nominee" in reference to Rand.

Who is it that decides those who take on the establishment can't win? What does it say about the people that can win?

#39 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 11 May 2015 - 11:55 AM

Why not? What forces prevent that but will allow a Hillary win?

The same types of things were said about Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. Before Bernie, people were saying "'They' will never 'let' him be the nominee" in reference to Rand.

Who is it that decides those who take on the establishment can't win? What does it say about the people that can win?

 

It's just a gut feeling for me about Bernie, based on lots of stuff.

Of course lots of people supported Hillary in 2008 because they didn't think a black man could get elected and that turned out not to be the case. 

I still don't think Bernie could win in the general election.



#40 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 12 May 2015 - 07:13 PM

Interesting way to run a campaign... too scared to speak... pretty sad... I hope people are paying close attention... 

 

Welcome to day 29 of the Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign!
 
In those 29 days – including April 12, the day she announced, and today – Clinton has taken a total of eight questions from the press.  That breaks out to roughly one question every 3.6 days. Of late, she's taken even fewer questions than that. According to media reports, the last day Clinton answered a question was April 21 in New Hampshire; that means that she hasn't taken a question from the media in 20 straight days.
 

  • GrumpyGranny and kelley like this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users