Swift Boat once? Shame on you.
Swift Boat twice? Shame on you.
This is clearly another Swift Boat style attack against Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. The fact that Trump has donated to it could cause it to backfire - why is Trump donating to something he considers corrupt?
So…WHAT DO PEOPLE THINK HAPPENS IN POLITICS? (or even business in general…these kind of meetings happen ALL THE TIME)
I would love for people to do an investigation of every cabinet member, politician, congressman, President, etc. and see how many of them have meetings based on nepotism or people in their professional networks.
I think it’s time to point the American voter’s attention to the actual scam happening in real time - the one where a candidate for president - who is on record as stating that he could make a profit off of running for office - is actively in the process of doing so.
There’s been a media lynch mob ganging up on the Foundation since AP’s (misleading) report yesterday, even after it announced a sensible plan to scale it down if Hillary was elected.
They screamed “Unethical!” “Shut down NOW!” but nobody, NOBODY answered exactly why. As far as I can tell they all reacted only to optics but didn’t have any facts or evidence of any wrongdoing to justify their call for its immediate shutdown.
It sickens me.
Here’s the Rude Pundit’s take on the phony Clinton Cash bs!
I love how he brings the NRA into the fight!
No one seems to know exactly what the Clinton Foundation does, which is why it needs to opposed. Like NAFTA and TPP, it’s just bad because it exists.
SMERSH, SPECTRE, Focus on the Family: these are amateur organizations compared to the CF. I know this because Dems keep wringing their hands and demanding that it disband immediately, unlike their relative silence of the other three.
This just in. NO VIRGINS FOUND IN WASHINGTON. Film at 11.
OK, so in more than four years – about 210 weeks – she had phone calls or meetings with 54 “private citizens” who also were donors to the Clinton Foundation? You’re saying about 1/4 phone calls or meetings a week with people who were donors at some point between 2001 and 2009? Donors like friends of her family who donated when asked? Or Bono?
And there’s no evidence that any one of those donors received any benefit from Clinton or the State Department as a result of the meeting, or their donation? Even after Judicial Watch, the FBI, the AP and the NY Times tried to make those connections?
Give me a break.
Hey, why not focus on the guy who admits to bribing public officials? Here’s Donald Trump a little over a years ago at an August 2015 GOP debate.
I gave to many people, before this, before two months ago, I was a businessman. I give to everybody. When they call, I give.
And do you know what?
When I need something from them two years later, three years later, I call them, they are there for me.
So you have someone for whom there are accusations but no evidence of bribery in Clinton, and someone who brags on national TV about bribing public officials in Trump.
And we’re worried about Clinton. What a country.
As George Carlin said, “It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it.”
A deplorable state of affairs? Sure.
News? Not really.
It would be fantastic if pay for access were banished from our political system, but that would require a sustained effort from our citizenry, not just fake outrage when you see your political opponents doing it.
Since you obviously don’t know how to use Google, I’ll help you out!
Click on the address below and then get a adult to read it out loud to you!
Here’s some numbers for a organization that in your world, doesn’t exist!
I would have liked Camp Clinton to get a head of this story before it became a 24/7 “scandal”. I don’t think responding defensively will be helpful. AP cherry-picked? C’mon…Oh, we’ll change if elected…that’s just lame. Offense is the best defense with these non-scandals. So far James Carville is the only person who has actually defended the Foundation in the most basic way: shut it down and people will die. Bannon is about to unleash a whole host of “scandals” (Laureate is next) against the Clintons perpetuating the perception that they are crooked. We can’t underestimate the effect this piling-on may have on the election.
I wonder if the two most egregious things about this are
- It is GLOBAL and
- The majority of people helped have excess melanin in their skin.
The Republican Candidate: Lies like he breathes, cheats, hocks absurd crap, scams people out of millions of dollars, hosted a brain dead reality show, has rape allegations directed at him, had a violence childhood, declared 7 bankruptcies, married an call girl/model, stokes hatred, is a racists, stokes xenophobia, refuses to release his tax returns, and could have shadowy ties to Putin. If I missed anything, I apologize.
The Democratic Candidate: Ran an international charity, used an e-mail servers that was more secure that than previous persons in her position, endured endless Benghazi “investigations” and that found no wrongdoing.
So it’s completely understandable that the Democratic candidate would be the focus of the press for her “scandals.”
Fucking spot on.
Right…because rich people donating and calling the Secretary of State are somehow mutually exclusive UNLESS there is something nefarious going on…but…sheeple gotta sheep. This is ridiculous.
They should go on offense about this - the Clinton Foundation does outstanding work and people will be very hurt if the foundation shuts down.
They need to get out there and explain what work they’re doing.
Cuz you know what? maybe these individuals and corporations give because it’s actually a good cause that works.
I don’t get your point. Are you suggesting I am a sheeple and missing something? Because if you have evidence that donations to the Foundation resulted in Clinton using her power as Secretary of State to give them benefits, please present it. But so far not even an invitation to a cocktail party has surfaced.
You appear to be saying, and I could be wrong, that rich people get access which is a separate issue. Truly, rich folks don’t really need to donate to the Foundation to get access because they are rich people. And that’s an issue, but not this issue.
Show me the difference between the NRA and the Clinton Foundation!
One big difference is at least the Clinton Foundation isn’t active or part of mass shootings here in this country!
“Motherfu*kers, you want evil in action? Members of Congress are under constant threat from the National Rifle Association. The NRA shovels shit tons of money into the campaigns of primarily Republicans, and you can fucking well bet that when Wayne LaPierre wants one of them on the phone, they will stop everything they’re doing - filibustering a bill to help poor people, getting blown by a page, shooting up heroin into their thighs - to take the call. That’s called access and its only purpose is to enrich the gun corporations with the blood of Americans. That shit’s evil.”
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2016/08/clinton-foundation-revelations-how-is.htmll
People pay for access to people all the time in private industry. Look at how many times there are auctions for a lunch with Warren Buffet, or Bill Gates, or a round of golf with a PGA pro, or a lot of other things. The money goes to charity, and what better way for someone famous to raise money than to give some of their time to someone who values it?