• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bill Clinton, Inc

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Starbuck1975 said:
Jimmy Carter I find to be a more inspirational model for post presidential advocacy and engagement
Click to expand...
Based on what metrics? I am guessing not lives saved.

http://www.politifact.com/global-ne...n-clinton-foundation-helped-9-million-lower-/
Clinton Foundation helped 9 million with lower-cost AIDS drugs
rulings-tom-true.gif
 
That's the problem with these attacks on the Clintons, they make good headlines, but once you read what it's all about, there is no beef there.
 
brycejones said:
I would be interested in seeing Jaskalas' proof for his claims.
Click to expand...

Try the OP, and his first article.

Inside ‘Bill Clinton Inc.’: Hacked memo reveals intersection of charity and personal income
“We have dedicated ourselves to helping the President secure and engage in for-profit activities,” Band wrote. He also said he had “sought to leverage my activities, including my partner role at Teneo, to support and to raise funds for the foundation.”
Click to expand...
 
senseamp said:
Based on what metrics? I am guessing not lives saved.

http://www.politifact.com/global-ne...n-clinton-foundation-helped-9-million-lower-/
Clinton Foundation helped 9 million with lower-cost AIDS drugs
rulings-tom-true.gif
Click to expand...
I think what some of us have a problem with is that Bill Clinton set a new precedence for former Presidents leveraging the power and influence of their positions as a vehicle to amass tremendous personal wealth. That is what I expect from Republicans.

I much prefer the humble and more restrained approach of Carter.

Will be interesting to see what model Obama pursues, as he is relatively young as a former president and can achieve much as a private citizen.
 
EXCUSE ME but the Trumps have already enriched themselves during the election based on Donald's position as a candidate. Ivanka's dress sold at Macy's same one she wore during the convention.
 
Starbuck1975 said:
I think what some of us have a problem with is that Bill Clinton set a new precedence for former Presidents leveraging the power and influence of their positions as a vehicle to amass tremendous personal wealth. That is what I expect from Republicans.

I much prefer the humble and more restrained approach of Carter.

Will be interesting to see what model Obama pursues, as he is relatively young as a former president and can achieve much as a private citizen.
Click to expand...

Former Presidents get paid a lot of money for speeches, and are very wealthy.
The difference with Clinton is that he is using his perceived influence and power to raise money to save millions of lives. That is a good thing all around.
If someone gets to meet Hillary or Bill because they gave money that will save thousands of lives, it doesn't bother me. I guess I am not one of those people who will say, it's better that those people die so we can avoid a potential appearance of impropriety.
 
pauldun170 said:
So in review
Ex president sets up foundation to help address global issues.
People invite a former US president to come speak since Presidents usually have "interesting things to say"
Since travelling from place to place to talk for a couple of hours cost money, ex president charges a fee. Since ex president is popular and there are a lot for people asking him to speak.
People involved with foundation ask for donations because "addressing global stuff costs money sometimes"
People donate to the foundation for "reasons"

Complaint #1 is that ex President charges money to speak and due to demand and logistics involved, ex President is able to charge a decent chunk of change.

Complaint #2 is that some people donate to the foundation hoping that those donations leads to closer relationship with that president and access to the ex President's rolodex.

Complaint #3 that an ex President receives gifts from people who invited him to come over and hangout.

Complaint #4 is that people who work for organizations send emails back and forth as part of an "email conversation about stuff"

Complaint #5 is that retired people have income streams or something.

Complaint #6 is That retired people who are asked to travel around the world to speak and\or provide advice charge money for their time and effort while acting on behalf for charitable organizations that requires donations to operate. AKA Pay old person to come speak on stuff and then have old person ask the people that show up to give more money to an organization that helps people. Some of those people who show up do it for personal reasons that have nothing to do with helping people.

Complaint #7 - Bill Clinton is still popular and Reagan is dead therefore Republicans lack a living figurehead. That and "Reagan" isn't trending with Millennials due to Tootie rule.Was it around during the 'Facts of Life' era, "Living Single" era "Housewives of Atlanta" era.

Complaint #8 something something something Bill and Bengahzi both start with B and when you put 2 B's together it equals BB and BB's hurt so impeach Hillary because emails bengahzi crooked thing and stuff.
Click to expand...
Nice summary. But.. you just know there's gotta be sump'n else going on. It's Clintons after all.
 
Starbuck1975 said:
I think what some of us have a problem with is that Bill Clinton set a new precedence for former Presidents leveraging the power and influence of their positions as a vehicle to amass tremendous personal wealth. That is what I expect from Republicans.

I much prefer the humble and more restrained approach of Carter.

Will be interesting to see what model Obama pursues, as he is relatively young as a former president and can achieve much as a private citizen.
Click to expand...

Carter made millions over the years on book sales and speaking fees. He is now an old man who can't
Clinton made millions over the years on book sales and speaking fees.
Clinton was more successful in both Presidency and post presidency doing same activity
 
pauldun170 said:
So in review
Ex president sets up foundation to help address global issues.
People invite a former US president to come speak since Presidents usually have "interesting things to say"
Since travelling from place to place to talk for a couple of hours cost money, ex president charges a fee. Since ex president is popular and there are a lot for people asking him to speak.
People involved with foundation ask for donations because "addressing global stuff costs money sometimes"
People donate to the foundation for "reasons"

Complaint #1 is that ex President charges money to speak and due to demand and logistics involved, ex President is able to charge a decent chunk of change.

Complaint #2 is that some people donate to the foundation hoping that those donations leads to closer relationship with that president and access to the ex President's rolodex.

Complaint #3 that an ex President receives gifts from people who invited him to come over and hangout.

Complaint #4 is that people who work for organizations send emails back and forth as part of an "email conversation about stuff"

Complaint #5 is that retired people have income streams or something.

Complaint #6 is That retired people who are asked to travel around the world to speak and\or provide advice charge money for their time and effort while acting on behalf for charitable organizations that requires donations to operate. AKA Pay old person to come speak on stuff and then have old person ask the people that show up to give more money to an organization that helps people. Some of those people who show up do it for personal reasons that have nothing to do with helping people.

Complaint #7 - Bill Clinton is still popular and Reagan is dead therefore Republicans lack a living figurehead. That and "Reagan" isn't trending with Millennials due to Tootie rule.Was it around during the 'Facts of Life' era, "Living Single" era "Housewives of Atlanta" era.

Complaint #8 something something something Bill and Bengahzi both start with B and when you put 2 B's together it equals BB and BB's hurt so impeach Hillary because emails bengahzi crooked thing and stuff.
Click to expand...

The biggest issue Hillary has with the paid speeches is an optics problem taking money from banks she eventually hopes to appoint people to regulate.

Generally it's smart in such a position to even avoid any possible appearance of conflict of interest. Fortunately for her, the GOP & friends completely overblow the issue with the other bullshit you cited which burns their own credibility.
 
It seems that concern-trolling republicans are more concerned that democrats and/or Hillary supporters simply aren't "concerned enough" about the Clinton foundation...."scandal." It's not that they are upset that people don't see it as a real issue or corruption, they just want to see concern.

OK, I'm concerned.

Is that better? Everyone happy?

OK, any actual issues to discuss?
 
MomentsofSanity said:
I gotta say I love these threads trying to link things that have no connection at all to show wrongdoing and yet Trump himself has used donated funds repeatedly for himself. Buying portraits of himself. Using donated funds to pay personal fines. Not a peep from the right on that though.
Click to expand...

Don't forget writing a "Trump Foundation" cheque to Pam Bondi as FL AG after she dismissed the lawsuit against him.

Totally legit.
 
MixMasterTang said:
And that mentions profits from the "Clinton Foundation" exactly where? He made profits off of his speeches and other engagements but most people already knew that? I am failing to see any "wrong doing" so please enlighten me.
Click to expand...

In all fairness the clintons are now the 1%, so they're wheeling & dealing with the high rollers now. Real americans hate that, unless they're obligated to carry water for those they're hoping for some fluids to eventually trickle down from.

It's all part of the jewish banking/media conspiracy controlled by the Illuminati and possibly trilateral commission, everybody on talk radio say so.
 
senseamp said:
Habitat for humanity is a good charity, but you can't compare that impact to 9 million people getting AIDS medications. Also, the argument about charitable grants vs travel expenses is intentionally misleading, because the foundation does most of its charitable work directly, not through grants to third parties.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I just enjoy this article as a frame of reference
 
senseamp said:
He had it going until he used "Fox Nation" as a source of information.
Click to expand...
Fox sometimes achieves journalistic integrity. I dont care for their porn star anchors and sensationalism, but their's was the best moderated debate.

Off topic, but I find more and more local news stations are gravitating to the Fox News model.
 
Starbuck1975 said:
Fox sometimes achieves journalistic integrity. I dont care for their porn star anchors and sensationalism, but their's was the best moderated debate.

Off topic, but I find more and more local news stations are gravitating to the Fox News model.
Click to expand...
Fox Nation is like Fox News of Fox News.
 
UglyCasanova said:
Do you not consider it important?
Click to expand...

Nope. I know you can't stand Hill & Bill but why don't you try aiming at a target-rich environment, like Trump. There's targets to choose from, the only problem is figuring out where to start.

I think you're at something like 0-5 in batting down the Clintons here and this was another swing and a miss...
 
feralkid said:
Which Fox News anchors are you referring to as "Porn Stars"?
Click to expand...
I don't know their names. The gym I use has several big screens mounted above the treadmill area, and they have three side by side tuned to the major cable news channels: CNN, MSNBC and FOX. Even without hearing the audio, it is an interesting contrast of imagery and conclusions you can draw on target demographics based on presentation style.

I just did a search out of curiosity, and realized Kennedy as in Kennedy the MTv VJ is one of them. How the hell does that happen?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top