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

[Art&Science]

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.

If you have an issue with moderator actions, post it in Moderator Discussions. Not here.
admin allisolm

 

[MomentsofSanity]

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.

 

[Jaskalas]

This what you're looking for?

AUGUST 22, 2016, New Abedin Emails Reveal Hillary Clinton State Department Gave Special Access to Top Clinton Foundation Donors

 

[fskimospy]

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.

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]

This what you're looking for?

AUGUST 22, 2016, New Abedin Emails Reveal Hillary Clinton State Department Gave Special Access to Top Clinton Foundation Donors

Surely we don't have to go through the list of all the false and misleading claims Judicial Watch has made again, do we?

 

[Jaskalas]

Surely we don't have to go through the list of all the false and misleading claims Judicial Watch has made again, do we?

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

 

[Moonbeam]

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.

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.

 

[Jaskalas]

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.

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.

 

[fskimospy]

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

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.

 

[Jaskalas]

Fox is literally repeating Judicial Watch's statement.

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.

 

[fskimospy]

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.

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.

 

[theeedude]

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."

 

[MongGrel]

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

Your own link makes the Fox guys look ridiculous.

 

[MongGrel]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying_in_the_United_States

Trump is running his campaign with foreign donors without any disclosure involved. And just passing a lot of it onto his kids.

 

[brycejones]

Why isn't this a thread yet? Don't try to bury this in some other thread moderators.

.

Mod call out in the OP...Klassy with a K

 

[brycejones]

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.

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

 

[Vic]

Guys, the wolf is for real this time.. really.

 

[ivwshane]

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

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.

 

[Jhhnn]

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.

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.

 

[werepossum]

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.

 

[theeedude]

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

 

[Miramonti]

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:

 

[dainthomas]

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:

 

[theeedude]

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.

 

[werepossum]

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

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.

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:

+1

It's a wee bit different for the Clintons though, as their foundation is essentially a black hole.