The Official Hillary Campaign Machine

#352
#352
Septic said:
:eek:k:

Seems that the quid pro quo is at the root of this - otherwise it's nothing more than speculation and hope, probably a bit of both.

One could argue that Bill speaking in countries that donate to his foundation is good business for the charity. I believe it would draw ire if his speaking engagements were being "purchased" through charitable contributions - there's no evidence of that, is there?

At the end of the day, it's a charity and one Charity Navigator reports as:

  • On February 18, 2015, The Washington Post reported that, "the foundation has won accolades from philanthropy experts and has drawn bipartisan support, with members of the George W. Bush administration often participating in its programs."
  • The article also states that "in posting its donor data, the foundation goes beyond legal requirements, and experts say its transparency level exceeds that of most philanthropies."

Again, bang on Hillary and her lack of moral character - there's no defending that but trying to tie Hillary to FIFA corruption because FIFA donated to the Clinton Foundation is an assault on intellectual honesty. It's just.... stupid.
Click to expand...
lol
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    73.2 KB · Views: 1
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#353
#353
She is a old crook... Nobody discusses her age. She would only be a few month younger when Reagon was sworn in and the media thought he was unfit due to his age
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#359
#359
SpaceCoastVol said:
But TMZ will be nonstop about the cankle hiding dresses she will wear, so nobody will notice. (The scandals that is) The libs don't care about any of it. She's a strong woman.
Click to expand...

She is a joke.. She let an unknown beat her last time.. History will repeat.. Her time was 08.. She is going to look old and tired during the debates.. Remember how Newt looked last time... Old and a retread
 
#360
#360
Biopsyman said:
She is a joke.. She let an unknown beat her last time.. History will repeat.. Her time was 08.. She is going to look old and tired during the debates.. Remember how Newt looked last time... Old and a retread
Click to expand...

For the sake of the country I pray you are right.
 
#361
#361
Remember her great advice on combatting increased costs by the govt including the minimum wage for the guy who owned a pizza company in 08.. "Raise the price of your pizza" simply Brillant...I would not let her be my latex salesman
 
#362
#362
Biopsyman said:
Maybe she can provide lessons on trading cattle futures
Click to expand...

If you actually review what she did it was outrageous. She traded on margin with not nearly enough capital and her broker assigned trades to her account after the trades were over. Meaning winning trades were assigned to her account and losing trades were put in suckers accounts. Dude got banned from the industry
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#363
#363
VolsNSkinsFan said:
If you actually review what she did it was outrageous. She traded on margin with not nearly enough capital and her broker assigned trades to her account after the trades were over. Meaning winning trades were assigned to her account and losing trades were put in suckers accounts. Dude got banned from the industry
Click to expand...

No nothing happened to her... By the SEC OR THe FBi... Can't tell me the smartest women on the planet never asked any questions or just played dumb..
 
#364
#364
Septic said:
:eek:k:

Seems that the quid pro quo is at the root of this - otherwise it's nothing more than speculation and hope, probably a bit of both.

One could argue that Bill speaking in countries that donate to his foundation is good business for the charity. I believe it would draw ire if his speaking engagements were being "purchased" through charitable contributions - there's no evidence of that, is there?

At the end of the day, it's a charity and one Charity Navigator reports as:

  • On February 18, 2015, The Washington Post reported that, "the foundation has won accolades from philanthropy experts and has drawn bipartisan support, with members of the George W. Bush administration often participating in its programs."
  • The article also states that "in posting its donor data, the foundation goes beyond legal requirements, and experts say its transparency level exceeds that of most philanthropies."

Again, bang on Hillary and her lack of moral character - there's no defending that but trying to tie Hillary to FIFA corruption because FIFA donated to the Clinton Foundation is an assault on intellectual honesty. It's just.... stupid.
Click to expand...

The New York Times takes down the Clinton Foundation. This could be devastating for Bill and Hillary – Telegraph Blogs

The Clinton Foundation Only Spent 10 Percent On Charity In 2013
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#365
#365
It's being reported that when FIFA picked Qutar as its location, Bill Clinton aka WJC LLC was so mad that he shattered a mirror.

Why so mad WJC LLC?
 
#368
#368
theFallGuy said:
The New York Times takes down the Clinton Foundation. This could be devastating for Bill and Hillary – Telegraph Blogs

The Clinton Foundation Only Spent 10 Percent On Charity In 2013
Click to expand...

wow... the closing statement in the article from the NYT is killer.

The reality is that this is a man who – in May 1993 – prevented other planes from landing at LAX for 90 minues while he got a haircut from a Beverley Hills hairdresser aboard Air Force One. The Clintons are populists in the same way that Barack Obama is a Nobel prize winner. Oh, wait…
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#373
#373
The Dems are going to kill themselves by first limiting the number of candidates so Hillary can have an easier time through the primaries. Then they won't have any viable candidates when she flames out half way through the campaign.
 
#374
#374
YorkVol said:
The Dems are going to kill themselves by first limiting the number of candidates so Hillary can have an easier time through the primaries. Then they won't have any viable candidates when she flames out half way through the campaign.
Click to expand...

Not sure how you figure. Why would she flame out if there are no serious or viable contenders? Getting the party nom is half the battle... More than half if the GOP trots out another primary superstar that can't resonate with the modearacy of American voters.

An easy path to the party nomination leaves pots of gold left over for the general and nothing to backtrack or pivot from. Again, I don't understand how you believe the dems are killing themselves with a giant front runner with a fat wallet and big name recognition.
 
#375
#375
Septic said:
:eek:k:

Seems that the quid pro quo is at the root of this - otherwise it's nothing more than speculation and hope, probably a bit of both.

One could argue that Bill speaking in countries that donate to his foundation is good business for the charity. I believe it would draw ire if his speaking engagements were being "purchased" through charitable contributions - there's no evidence of that, is there?

At the end of the day, it's a charity and one Charity Navigator reports as:

  • On February 18, 2015, The Washington Post reported that, "the foundation has won accolades from philanthropy experts and has drawn bipartisan support, with members of the George W. Bush administration often participating in its programs."
  • The article also states that "in posting its donor data, the foundation goes beyond legal requirements, and experts say its transparency level exceeds that of most philanthropies."

Again, bang on Hillary and her lack of moral character - there's no defending that but trying to tie Hillary to FIFA corruption because FIFA donated to the Clinton Foundation is an assault on intellectual honesty. It's just.... stupid.
Click to expand...

The conflict of interest is clear. For CoI to exist there doesn't have to be quid pro quo. The facts are that foreign countries donated directly to HC's private foundation at the same time they were seeking favor before State.

That is a conflict of interest pure and simple. It doesn't require qpq and most organizations would not allow for this behavior on the grounds of coi. At a minimum they would require extensive documentation showing how CoI will be explicitly avoided.

Further, hiring the spouse or brother while lobbying State is also CoI.

People seem to get wound up about illegality. Qpq would be illegal. CoI is not illegal per se. Still, it is highly discouraged since the pqp part is so hard to prove.

The grand irony is that HC touts her transparency but her answer to questions is "we weren't legally required to disclose" (as in the shell corp to funnel funds to Bill).

This is absolutely sleazy as can be and the FIFA example simply shows that the Clintons will take where ever and whenever they can.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top