• 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.

Breaking - emails show proof Hillary sold access to SD through Foundation

Emails show proof people sought access by trying to lobby for it. Emails don't show anyone got it. The ambassador in that email has already said no meeting was granted.

What they show is someone tried to leverage a relationship for access. None was given. Or is it a surprise to you that someone would try to lobby for access through connections?

And you're a couple weeks late with this. Has already been discussed and no proof of access was ever demonstrated.

An article from August 10th is not breaking news.
 
Art&Science said:
Why isn't this a thread yet? Don't try to bury this in some other thread moderators.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...a-11e6-9d2f-b1a3564181a1_story.html?tid=a_inl

Any ONE of us does this - we're not going to jail, we're going UNDER the jail.

This woman is a snake and totally and completely corrupt.
Click to expand...

Did you even read your own link? You wouldn't go to jail for that nor would anyone else. There's no wrongdoing shown in the article.

I like how you thought there would be a conspiracy by the moderators against you though. That's some solid paranoia and delusion of persecution.
 
fskimospy said:
Did you even read your own link? You wouldn't go to jail for that nor would anyone else. There's no wrongdoing shown in the article.

I like how you thought there would be a conspiracy by the moderators against you though. That's some solid paranoia and delusion of persecution.
Click to expand...

The thing that motivates people to become nut-cases is the special status they imagine they acquire believing things rational people can't themselves imagine. It is a compensation they dispense to themselves to keep at bay the feeling they are worthless. It always feels better to egotists to be a raving lunatic than a nobody.
 
Moonbeam said:
The thing that motivates people to become nut-cases is the special status they imagine they acquire believing things rational people can't themselves imagine. It is a compensation they dispense to themselves to keep at bay the feeling they are worthless. It always feels better to egotists to be a raving lunatic than a nobody.
Click to expand...

Nice of you to call half the country raving lunatics.
Of course you probably said that and painted yourself into a corner prior to seeing Fox cover the story. This isn't fringe, it's right wing and mainstream.
 
Jaskalas said:
Again? That would assume I read those charges against them.
Then again... it's probably just you wanting to dispute the meaning of the emails, whose content likely speaks for itself.

Moreover, Fox is covering it.
Emails reveal Clinton aide gave foundation donors 'special' access, group says
Click to expand...

Fox is literally repeating Judicial Watch's statement. It is not saying that statement is accurate.

Judicial Watch is an ultra right wing organization founded by a guy who literally sued Obama for purposefully allowing Ebola into the country to kill Caucasians and Jews. They recently claimed the government sent people down to Florida to whip up pro Treyvon Martin protests. It is not a reputable source.
 
fskimospy said:
Fox is literally repeating Judicial Watch's statement.
Click to expand...

That is noteworthy, but who on the right would dispute the message / content of this subject?

You want to pin it on a shady source, but Fox brings it to mainstream attention and are they going to refute it? Don't think so. If the right wing ducks weren't lined up for this, it'd be a lot more believable to think the content of those emails is... I dunno, what are you claiming? You want to say they're fake? They're probably real, I think you'd argue over the meaning and interpretation of them. We don't need the source the read the emails and determine the Clinton corruption for ourselves.

This is beyond Judaical Watch.
 
Jaskalas said:
That is noteworthy, but who on the right would dispute the message / content of this subject?

You want to pin it on a shady source, but Fox brings it to mainstream attention and are they going to refute it? Don't think so. If the right wing ducks weren't lined up for this, it'd be a lot more believable to think the content of those emails is... I dunno, what are you claiming? You want to say they're fake? They're probably real, I think you'd argue over the meaning and interpretation of them. We don't need the source the read the emails and determine the Clinton corruption for ourselves.

This is beyond Judaical Watch.
Click to expand...

No it isn't, your post relied entirely on their interpretation of isolated emails. Considering their long history of extreme right wing advocacy and their rampant disregard for the truth there's little reason to think they have suddenly become more honest now.

I'll wait for an actually reputable source to report on this. I would strongly suggest that in the future you disregard extreme partisan organizations like this whether from the left or the right. They are simply too dishonest.
 
So? Independent contributions in exchange for access are not corruption, and aren't even appearance of corruption, according to Citizens United. You can do it all day long, and you won't go to jail, under jail, over jail, or near a jail. In fact, Republicans will call what you are doing "free speech."
 
Jaskalas said:
That is noteworthy, but who on the right would dispute the message / content of this subject?

You want to pin it on a shady source, but Fox brings it to mainstream attention and are they going to refute it? Don't think so. If the right wing ducks weren't lined up for this, it'd be a lot more believable to think the content of those emails is... I dunno, what are you claiming? You want to say they're fake? They're probably real, I think you'd argue over the meaning and interpretation of them. We don't need the source the read the emails and determine the Clinton corruption for ourselves.

This is beyond Judaical Watch.
Click to expand...

So we're going with if more people repeat the same source it must be the truth. That's how an echo chamber works.
 
brycejones said:
So we're going with if more people repeat the same source it must be the truth. That's how an echo chamber works.
Click to expand...

The funny thing about that is that they are totally oblivious to it! Its amazing watching right wing nuts (I'd imagine a left wing nut acts the same way) in action. They read something they want to be true and their source provides just enough innuendo to give them cover and the nuts spread the "news", then when it's pointed out to them that their source is no good they find another source that says the same thing, never once questioning why their first source was bad or why their second source was repeating the same shit. Rinse and repeat.

My question is; what came first? The wing nut who doesn't know that's what he's doing or political powers who see this as a tool (see trump, or president Bush's admin when they were quoting themselves to push for war).

Its fascinating in a really scary way.
 
ivwshane said:
The funny thing about that is that they are totally oblivious to it! Its amazing watching right wing nuts (I'd imagine a left wing nut acts the same way) in action. They read something they want to be true and their source provides just enough innuendo to give them cover and the nuts spread the "news", then when it's pointed out to them that their source is no good they find another source that says the same thing, never once questioning why their first source was bad or why their second source was repeating the same shit. Rinse and repeat.

My question is; what came first? The wing nut who doesn't know that's what he's doing or political powers who see this as a tool (see trump, or president Bush's admin when they were quoting themselves to push for war).

Its fascinating in a really scary way.
Click to expand...

It's not like such people can be confused by reason or logic. They've already decided that the Clintons must be hiding something, anything, everything. When proof of such is found to be lacking they just elevate the Clintons to the status of Bond Villains, criminal masterminds so devious that they leave no trace of their nefarious activities.
 
This is the way government will operate under President Clinton II: The Revenge. Want something from the taxpayer or federal government? Get your multi-million dollar donation into the Clinton Family Foundation and we'll discuss it. Until then, no meeting will be granted. I see no reason to assume that Trump will be any better, given his personal history. Hell, he may figure out ways to be worse. (Unless one believes the left wing claim that he became a billionaire on autopilot, anyway.) With both parties running such a candidate, pretty hard to ignore that this is on us, the voters.
 
The Clintons (Bill, Hillary, Chelsea) don't get paid any salary by the foundation, and actually donate a lot of the speaking fees that they could keep for themselves to it. So it's kind of ridiculous and disgusting to argue that there is quid pro quo, since the money goes to charity and not to Clinton's pocket.
Clinton Global Initiative is one of the best ran charities out there, helping save thousands of lives through public health efforts. And it's being attacked by the "pro-life" right that hasn't lifted a finger to do anything.
https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillary-chelsea-clinton-foundation/478
 
In light of this, I've created a comprehensive list of each local, state, and national level politician that can't be bought in one way or another through political donations:
 
The money has to actually get to the person you are trying to buy. Clintons don't take a paycheck from their foundation, they give their foundation money instead.
 
senseamp said:
The Clintons (Bill, Hillary, Chelsea) don't get paid any salary by the foundation, and actually donate a lot of the speaking fees that they could keep for themselves to it. So it's kind of ridiculous and disgusting to argue that there is quid pro quo, since the money goes to charity and not to Clinton's pocket.
Clinton Global Initiative is one of the best ran charities out there, helping save thousands of lives through public health efforts. And it's being attacked by the "pro-life" right that hasn't lifted a finger to do anything.
https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillary-chelsea-clinton-foundation/478
Click to expand...
Maybe, depending on how much one trusts Daniel Borochoff. Unlike other watchdog organizations like Charity Navigator (the biggest and by far the most prestigious), Charity Watch neither follows GAAP nor publishes its methodology, so like the Clinton Family Foundation itself, you are required to take its ratings on faith.

Miramonti said:
In light of this, I've created a comprehensive list of each local, state, and national level politician that can't be bought in one way or another through political donations:
Click to expand...
😀 +1

It's a wee bit different for the Clintons though, as their foundation is essentially a black hole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top