Donald Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Traitor Don is taking advice from the Brain of Breitbart:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-idUSKCN10Y1YC
In attacking Clinton foundation, Trump seeks a Republican rallying cry

After struggling to find a consistent message and consolidate party support, Donald Trump is honing his attack on Democratic presidential rival Hillary Clinton and the foundation bearing her family's name in hopes of making it a rallying cry for fellow Republicans.

Trump began hammering the Democrat this week over the Clinton Foundation, an organization created by her and her husband former President Bill Clinton that funds aid programs in developing countries.

On Monday, Trump called for the foundation to be shut down and for a special prosecutor to be named to investigate it. In particular, he accused Clinton of having turned the charity into a "pay-for-play" scheme in which wealthy donors to the organization got favors from the State Department while Clinton was secretary of state from 2009-2013. The Clinton campaign denied that, saying Clinton never took any action because of donations to the foundation.

So, what is the foundation doing? Is it some nefarious money funnel to the Clinton bank account? No, actually, the foundation is involved in some really good projects that save lives and otherwise makes life better for others around the world. And it's very efficient in turning donations into work in the field. From wikipedia: CharityWatch, says that 88% of the foundation's money goes toward its charitable mission and gave the foundation an A rating for 2016.[9]

Initiatives funded by the Clinton foundation include expanding access to healthcare, promoting growth of small businesses in poor areas not just in the US but elswhere in the world, education, disaster relief. Exactly how much good has the Donald accomplished that he feels emboldened to cast shade on the Clinton Foundation?

So, typical of Trump, he cares not or knows nothing of the good works being done. "Shut it Down" he says. He only sees an opportunity to attack an opponent.
Click to expand...
if hillary started a fake university that bilked its students out of millions for phony real estate advice, he'd be all for it.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
SamsonsRiddle said:
http://spectator.org/shut-it-down-the-clinton-foundation-is-too-corrupt-to-exist/
A sampler from one of the most brazen scams going.
In December 2008, Bruce Lindsey, the Chief Executive Officer of the Clinton Foundation, and Valerie Jarrett, co-chairman of the Obama-Biden Transition Team, signed a memorandum of understanding that the activities of the Clinton Foundation would not “create conflicts or the appearance of conflicts for Senator Clinton as Secretary of State.”

During Secretary Clinton’s tenure, at least 181 individuals, companies, and foreign governments gave money to the Clinton Foundation while officially lobbying the State Department.

From 2001 to 2015, the Clinton Foundation raised over $2 billion in donations. From February 2001 to May 2015, Bill Clinton gave 637 speeches and made $132,021,691 in speaking fees alone. Hillary gave 92 speeches from February 2013 to March 2015. She was paid $21,648,000. While the Clintons made speeches to Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, it was the foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation that were the most disturbing.

In 13 speeches, Bill made at least $500,000. Eleven of those speeches occurred when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State (2009-2013). All eleven of those speeches were delivered outside of the United States, including Russia and China.

Since people don’t give that kind of money for nothing in return, the question is did these donors get pay for play immediately when Hillary was Secretary of State or did they expect something only if Hillary was elected president? In his 2015 book Clinton Cash, author Peter Schweizer argues that foreign donors have already received a return on their investment when Hillary was Secretary of State through Bill Clinton’s speaking fees and donations to the Clinton Foundation.

Kazakhstan: Clinton’s adventures with Frank Giustra didn’t begin with Russia. In 2005, Clinton went with Giustra to Kazakhstan to meet with President Nursultan Nazarbayev. Giustra’s obvious connections with Clinton clearly made an impression on the Kazakh dictator.

Two days after this meeting, Kazakhstan’s state-owned company, Kazatomprom, gave Giustra’s company the right to buy three uranium projects in the country. A few months later, Giustra returned the favor to Clinton by donating $31.3 million to the Clinton Foundation.

In 2006, Frank Giustra described his relationship with Clinton saying, “He’s a brand, a worldwide brand, and he can do things and ask for things that no one else can.”
Click to expand...
Nice job of copy and paste without any comment. It's almost as if you understood what you posted.

But really, the nub of this article's complaint boils down to this line:

"Since people don’t give that kind of money for nothing in return, the question is did these donors get pay for play immediately when Hillary was Secretary of State or did they expect something only if Hillary was elected president?"

What a shitty whiny bit of smear that is.The author asks "did they get pay for play immediately or expect favors later?" Its on the level of the classic "have you stopped beating your wife?" question. The honest truth is that there is no evidence that any pay for play from Hillary was expected or given. The Foundation is Bill's show. He doesn't hold office and he has incredible connections. It's perfectly legal for Bill to use those connections for donors. Of course, when Hillary is president, the foundation will have to be distanced from him or shut down. Shutting it down would be a shame because the Foundation does good work. It's because pin heads like you who can't seem to get the idea that money in the form of donations to a charity doesn't necessarily equal corruption.

Have you had a look at any the text that is causing the kerfluffle? I'm pretty sure you haven't. They are odious in that they do show people were trying to get access to Hillary for small favors (can you help me with my friend's visa?). But the e-mail strings showed those attempts were not successful.

These e-mails showed that Hillary and her team did not live up to the letter of her agreement to "not create...appearance of conflicts". That's all, no "pay for play" is established anywhere. At least nothing that's come to light. That said, if there is evidence of quid pro quo, then yeah, she should be held on charges.

Oh, and the e-mails have already been reviewed during the FBI's investigation. The head of the FBI said they found nothing that warranted criminal charges.

So suck it.
 
potroastV2

potroastV2

Well-Known Member
Exactly! And well said.

All of these complaints about the Clinton Foundation seem to ignore that Bill is an Ex-Pres, and the foundation is in his name. It should be called the Bill Clinton Foundation, and then all of these whiners would have to come up with something else. Are they also complaining about the Bush Foundation, or the Reagan Foundation?

:mrgreen:
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
rollitup said:
Exactly! And well said.

All of these complaints about the Clinton Foundation seem to ignore that Bill is an Ex-Pres, and the foundation is in his name. It should be called the Bill Clinton Foundation, and then all of these whiners would have to come up with something else. Are they also complaining about the Bush Foundation, or the Reagan Foundation?

:mrgreen:
Click to expand...
they'd complain less if instead of saving lives, she sold them scammy real estate courses and chewy steaks.
 
Flaming Pie

Flaming Pie

Well-Known Member
rollitup said:
Exactly! And well said.

All of these complaints about the Clinton Foundation seem to ignore that Bill is an Ex-Pres, and the foundation is in his name. It should be called the Bill Clinton Foundation, and then all of these whiners would have to come up with something else. Are they also complaining about the Bush Foundation, or the Reagan Foundation?

:mrgreen:
Click to expand...
Then why were donors visiting hillary as SoS?

Why did donors get contracts in Haiti?

How far up Hillary's ass is George Soros? Or is it the other way around?
 
Blunted 4 lyfe

Blunted 4 lyfe

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Traitor Don is taking advice from the Brain of Breitbart:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-idUSKCN10Y1YC
In attacking Clinton foundation, Trump seeks a Republican rallying cry

After struggling to find a consistent message and consolidate party support, Donald Trump is honing his attack on Democratic presidential rival Hillary Clinton and the foundation bearing her family's name in hopes of making it a rallying cry for fellow Republicans.

Trump began hammering the Democrat this week over the Clinton Foundation, an organization created by her and her husband former President Bill Clinton that funds aid programs in developing countries.

On Monday, Trump called for the foundation to be shut down and for a special prosecutor to be named to investigate it. In particular, he accused Clinton of having turned the charity into a "pay-for-play" scheme in which wealthy donors to the organization got favors from the State Department while Clinton was secretary of state from 2009-2013. The Clinton campaign denied that, saying Clinton never took any action because of donations to the foundation.

So, what is the foundation doing? Is it some nefarious money funnel to the Clinton bank account? No, actually, the foundation is involved in some really good projects that save lives and otherwise makes life better for others around the world. And it's very efficient in turning donations into work in the field. From wikipedia: CharityWatch, says that 88% of the foundation's money goes toward its charitable mission and gave the foundation an A rating for 2016.[9]

Initiatives funded by the Clinton foundation include expanding access to healthcare, promoting growth of small businesses in poor areas not just in the US but elswhere in the world, education, disaster relief. Exactly how much good has the Donald accomplished that he feels emboldened to cast shade on the Clinton Foundation?

So, typical of Trump, he cares not or knows nothing of the good works being done. "Shut it Down" he says. He only sees an opportunity to attack an opponent.
Click to expand...
The #whineylittlebitch likes to screw the little guy he walks away from his debts...this is his norm. Really?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/26/politics/donald-trump-hotel-air-conditioning-roanoke/?hpt=ob_galleryfooterexpansion
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Blunted 4 lyfe said:
The #whineylittlebitch likes to screw the little guy he walks away from his debts...this is his norm. Really?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/26/politics/donald-trump-hotel-air-conditioning-roanoke/?hpt=ob_galleryfooterexpansion
Click to expand...
hundreds of liens and lawsuits against Trump for this very reason. The shit has put small businesses under by doing this very same thing. Doesn't faze a Trump supporter one bit. Because Trump "tells it like it is". Fortunately they are a minority.
 
Blunted 4 lyfe

Blunted 4 lyfe

Well-Known Member
bluntmassa1 said:
Because Hitlery Cunton is the most corrupt politician since Nixon.
Click to expand...
Oh really? I guess Nixons vp (Spiro Agnew) doesn't count, Reagan and W. don't count either. Yea...ok! And let's not forget Papa Bush had to pardoned Reagans cabinets jail sentences.

Every last one of them should've gone to prison (some did) They were all pillars of society I guess. Now those were the real criminals not the smear campaign that Hillary has been through for decades on end.

B4L
 
Flaming Pie

Flaming Pie

Well-Known Member
Blunted 4 lyfe said:
Oh really? I guess Nixons vp (Spiro Agnew) doesn't count, Reagan and W. don't count either. Yea...ok! And let's not forget Papa Bush had to pardoned Reagans cabinets jail sentences.

Every last one of them should've gone to prison (some did) They were all pillars of society I guess. Now those were the real criminals not the smear campaign that Hillary has been through for decades on end.

B4L
Click to expand...
Or maybe they are all in on it together?
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
I just turned on the tv and caught a few moments of TRUMP! talking. I had to turn it off. This guy is pissing into the political pool that is going to set politics in America 100 years. You TRUMP! supporters bear the biggest chunk of the blame for this for wanting the same type of shit in your political reporting as you seem to want in your "entertainment news".
 
Flaming Pie

Flaming Pie

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
cool new conspiracy theory. we can file this one away with "the definitions of words are a conspiracy to silence me!".
Click to expand...
A conspiracy theory is an explanatory or speculative hypothesis suggesting that two or more persons, or an organization, have conspired to cause or cover up, through secret planning and deliberate action, an event or situation typically regarded as illegal or harmful.

Lookss like everyone here has formed a conspiracy theory. Even you.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Flaming Pie said:
A conspiracy theory is an explanatory or speculative hypothesis suggesting that two or more persons, or an organization, have conspired to cause or cover up, through secret planning and deliberate action, an event or situation typically regarded as illegal or harmful.

Lookss like everyone here has formed a conspiracy theory. Even you.
Click to expand...
the definitions of words are a conspiracy to silence me.
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
Flaming Pie said:
A conspiracy theory is an explanatory or speculative hypothesis suggesting that two or more persons, or an organization, have conspired to cause or cover up, through secret planning and deliberate action, an event or situation typically regarded as illegal or harmful.

Lookss like everyone here has formed a conspiracy theory. Even you.
Click to expand...
This is a perfect case where knowing the definition and understanding the term are very different things. Looking something up does not necessarily make you understand it.
 
Flaming Pie

Flaming Pie

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
This is a perfect case where knowing the definition and understanding the term are very different things. Looking something up does not necessarily make you understand it.
Click to expand...
Would you say that hillary attempted to cover up her email server use and inappropriate contact with donors while she was secretary of state?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top