So two people from the Clinton/Obama admins started a lobbying firm sometime between 2009 and 2012 (her time as Secy of state). Explain to me precisely how this lobbying firm played into specific State department decisions. Please be precise. The whole accusation is guilt by association. And then explain to me precisely what the Clinton Foundation has done wrong. And don't say 'refile tax returns' as if that's criminal and companies don't re-state or refile every all the time.
Are you not familiar with the Uranium One story at all? It has been discussed on these boards previously.
There are a number of transactions similar to this one where money flowed to the Clinton Foundation while decisions at State were being made. Hit the old google for more info on this story and others. Again...it reeks.
So two people from the Clinton/Obama admins started a lobbying firm sometime between 2009 and 2012 (her time as Secy of state). Explain to me precisely how this lobbying firm played into specific State department decisions. Please be precise. The whole accusation is guilt by association. And then explain to me precisely what the Clinton Foundation has done wrong. And don't say 'refile tax returns' as if that's criminal and companies don't re-state or refile every all the time.
Are you not familiar with the Uranium One story at all? It has been discussed on these boards previously.
There are a number of transactions similar to this one where money flowed to the Clinton Foundation while decisions at State were being made. Hit the old google for more info on this story and others. Again...it reeks.
I read the article thoroughly. Thanks for sharing. And I like the New Yorker. It generally has well articulated arguments. There are two key points that I always point back to when people accuse the foundation of being corrupt 1. The MOU between the Admin and Clinton to recuse herself from business where it intermingles with the Foundation. A conservative watchdog recently filed an FOIA for internal records related to any objections to her participation by career diplomats, bureaucrats, etc. To date, only one objection has ever been filed. 2. Any meaningful decision goes through multiple cabinet officers. For example, you don't sell arms without approval by the DOD/Sec of Defense. You don't do a mineral deal with Russia without Homeland Security and Interior signing off.
The one area that gave me pause on this article is around the tax disclosures. Those are problematic. But that could be lots of things, including errors by the public accounting firms, etc. I'm not sure if there's a fire under that smoke or not. But in all, the article raises questions, it doesn't draw conclusions.
I do appreciate that the author mentioned a few times about the work the the foundation does. It does tremendous work around the world for progressive causes. And you would be hard pressed to find a charity that uses a higher % of its contributions towards the actual causes, upwards of 80%.
Further evidence (not that it's needed) that Hillary is trying to buy this election: For $350,000 you can sit next to George Clooney at one of Hillary's fund raising event. Are millionaires and billionaires going to buy this election? Obviously that what Hillary wants. Is this what you want? Not me!
George is a great actor but, stupid as this may sound, it will taint my view of his work. I don't see how anyone can sell out to a (delete, delete, delete) like Hillary.
Another thing that I don't believe has been addressed here is Hillary's ties to private prisons. Dr. Cornell West has spoken out on that. I'll have to see if I can find a link.
I don't think Clooney is a good actor. George Clooney is good at playing George Clooney. He is the same character in every role. Good looking, good voice, and a devilish smile. And if you look at his IMDB, he has a half-ass resume.
Further evidence (not that it's needed) that Hillary is trying to buy this election: For $350,000 you can sit next to George Clooney at one of Hillary's fund raising event. Are millionaires and billionaires going to buy this election? Obviously that what Hillary wants. Is this what you want? Not me!
George is a great actor but, stupid as this may sound, it will taint my view of his work. I don't see how anyone can sell out to a (delete, delete, delete) like Hillary.
Another thing that I don't believe has been addressed here is Hillary's ties to private prisons. Dr. Cornell West has spoken out on that. I'll have to see if I can find a link.
I don't think Clooney is a good actor. George Clooney is good at playing George Clooney. He is the same character in every role. Good looking, good voice, and a devilish smile. And if you look at his IMDB, he has a half-ass resume.
He would make an excellent politician.
Yeah, maybe he missed his calling, haha!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Further evidence (not that it's needed) that Hillary is trying to buy this election: For $350,000 you can sit next to George Clooney at one of Hillary's fund raising event. Are millionaires and billionaires going to buy this election? Obviously that what Hillary wants. Is this what you want? Not me!
George is a great actor but, stupid as this may sound, it will taint my view of his work. I don't see how anyone can sell out to a (delete, delete, delete) like Hillary.
Another thing that I don't believe has been addressed here is Hillary's ties to private prisons. Dr. Cornell West has spoken out on that. I'll have to see if I can find a link.
I don't think Clooney is a good actor. George Clooney is good at playing George Clooney. He is the same character in every role. Good looking, good voice, and a devilish smile. And if you look at his IMDB, he has a half-ass resume.
He would make an excellent politician.
He probably would, but I think he's a pretty damn good actor too. He's been a lot of movies over the years where he was fantastic IMO.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Further evidence (not that it's needed) that Hillary is trying to buy this election: For $350,000 you can sit next to George Clooney at one of Hillary's fund raising event. Are millionaires and billionaires going to buy this election? Obviously that what Hillary wants. Is this what you want? Not me!
George is a great actor but, stupid as this may sound, it will taint my view of his work. I don't see how anyone can sell out to a (delete, delete, delete) like Hillary.
Another thing that I don't believe has been addressed here is Hillary's ties to private prisons. Dr. Cornell West has spoken out on that. I'll have to see if I can find a link.
I don't think Clooney is a good actor. George Clooney is good at playing George Clooney. He is the same character in every role. Good looking, good voice, and a devilish smile. And if you look at his IMDB, he has a half-ass resume.
He would make an excellent politician.
He probably would, but I think he's a pretty damn good actor too. He's been a lot of movies over the years where he was fantastic IMO.
He's stuff's been hit and miss for me but when he's on he's great:
Oh Brother, Where Art Thou Monument Men Perfect Storm (perfect for that part) The Men Who Stare at Goats (a few others I can't think of now)
Excellent narrator too.
He's make a great mayor of some cool little Southern California town that serves up good margaritas.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Further evidence (not that it's needed) that Hillary is trying to buy this election: For $350,000 you can sit next to George Clooney at one of Hillary's fund raising event. Are millionaires and billionaires going to buy this election? Obviously that what Hillary wants. Is this what you want? Not me!
George is a great actor but, stupid as this may sound, it will taint my view of his work. I don't see how anyone can sell out to a (delete, delete, delete) like Hillary.
Another thing that I don't believe has been addressed here is Hillary's ties to private prisons. Dr. Cornell West has spoken out on that. I'll have to see if I can find a link.
I don't think Clooney is a good actor. George Clooney is good at playing George Clooney. He is the same character in every role. Good looking, good voice, and a devilish smile. And if you look at his IMDB, he has a half-ass resume.
He would make an excellent politician.
He probably would, but I think he's a pretty damn good actor too. He's been a lot of movies over the years where he was fantastic IMO.
He's stuff's been hit and miss for me but when he's on he's great:
Oh Brother, Where Art Thou Monument Men Perfect Storm (perfect for that part) The Men Who Stare at Goats (a few others I can't think of now)
Excellent narrator too.
He's make a great mayor of some cool little Southern California town that serves up good margaritas.
Burn After Reading Up In The Air The Descendants The Ides of March Goodnight and Good Luck Oceans Eleven Syriana Michael Clayton The Thin Red Line
So many! And he was good in ER and Roseanne too.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Watched A Perfect Storm on Netflix the other night in honor of this thread. Meh....not impressed. Diane Lane was fantastic though. I would def vote for her.
You know, I always thought it was somewhat strange that so many Superdelegates had endorsed Hillary Clinton even many months before the Primary race started.
As Debbie Wasserman Schultz explained to Rachel Maddow, the Superdelegates should not be treated or counted like pledged delegates. They do not have to declare their preference until the Convention.
I always thought it was strange, then, that so many Party officials and officeholders would be tripping all over each other in a mad rush to endorse Hillary, when the convention was still a year away.
Now I know why.
You see, these Superdelegates are members of their State Democratic Parties, upon whom they rely for support and funding for re-election. And the money that will be available for those re-election efforts has, in many cases, been provided by Hillary Clinton.
Clinton has provided funds for these candidates through a sophisticated system of money laundering that has allowed the Clinton campaign to funnel billionaire’s donations to State parties in return for their participation in a massive money-laundering payback system to also funnel money to the Clinton campaign itself.
The whole sordid affair was recently brought to light in a Counterpunch article and showcased on The Young Turks. As Margot Kidder (yes, THAT Margot Kidder) writes in Counterpunch:
In August 2015, at the Democratic Party convention in Minneapolis, 33 democratic state parties made deals with the Hillary Clinton campaign and a joint fundraising entity called The Hillary Victory Fund. The deal allowed many of her core billionaire and inner circle individual donors to run the maximum amounts of money allowed through those state parties to the Hillary Victory Fund in New York and the DNC in Washington.
Remember, this was in AUGUST — 6 months before the first vote was cast in the actual Primary. Margot continues:
The idea was to increase how much one could personally donate to Hillary by taking advantage of the Supreme Court ruling 2014, McCutcheon v FEC, that knocked down a cap on aggregate limits as to how much a donor could give to a federal campaign in a year. It thus eliminated the ceiling on amounts spent by a single donor to a presidential candidate.
From these large amounts of money being transferred from state coffers to the Hillary Victory Fund in Washington, the Clinton campaign got the first $2,700, the DNC was to get the next $33,400, and the remainder was to be split among the 33 signatory states. With this scheme, the Hillary Victory Fund raised over $26 million for the Clinton Campaign by the end of 2015.
… and the rest of the money went to the State Parties and, eventually, the candidates, including many officeholders who are Superdelegates.
These Superdelegates are actually PLEDGED — to Clinton
Many people are speculating as to whether or not Superdelegates from States that have voted for Bernie will move their support away from Bernie.
Unfortunately, that will NEVER happen.
You see, when it comes to all this money flowing in from the millionaires and billionaires who give to Hillary, the Clinton Campaign can decide which State Parties get to partake in the spoils:
The fund is administered by treasurer Elizabeth Jones, the Clinton Campaign’s chief operating officer. Ms. Jones has the exclusive right to decide when transfers of money to and from the Hillary Victory Fund would be made to the state parties.
So if a Superdelegate whose State voted overwhelmingly for Bernie switched her support to Sanders under the reasoning that she was representing the will of her State, then Clinton’s Campaign COO would shut off the spigot and all that sweet, sweet billionaire cash would stop flowing into the coffers of her State Democratic Party — and the candidate herself.
As Kidder gently puts it:
One could reasonably infer that ... the super-delegates of these various partner states would either pledge loyalty to Clinton, or, at the least, not endorse Senator Sanders. Not only did Hillary’s multi-millionaire and billionaire supporters get to bypass individual campaign donation limits to state parties by using several state parties apparatus, but the Clinton campaign got the added bonus of buying that state’s super-delegates with the promise of contributions to that Democratic organization’s re-election fund.
So — there you have it. Not a pretty story. It is not just the money-laundering operation itself, which has allowed the Clinton campaign to “legally” obviate campaign finance law, but it has further allowed them to pervert the political process of the Democratic Party by “buying” the fealty of the Superdelegates. These Superdelegates are supposed to be “free to choose the best candidate” according to their own beliefs and their own conscience. But now many of them will have that choice essentially turned into a dilemma: they can support Hillary and stay in politics, or they can support Bernie and deprive both themselves and their State Party of significant funding from the Clinton campaign — thereby ending their career.
Watched A Perfect Storm on Netflix the other night in honor of this thread. Meh....not impressed. Diane Lane was fantastic though. I would def vote for her.
Yeah, I think that movie is way overrated, and not one of Clooney's better movies. Watch Burn After Reading if you haven't. Clooney's so good in that, and hilarious.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Yeah, Clinton is clearly the establishment choice. Bernie has 15 points, the fewest of any candidate still running.
No surprise Cruz is leading the GOP endorsement race, and no surprise Clinton is leading the Dem endorsement race. That's the way I'd expect the endorsements to go.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Yes, Bernie's supporters are doing a great job of making themselves an issue in the campaign. Just ask Dr. Song as example one.
This makes no sense. I am not an issue.
I didn't say all supporters.. But Dr. Song and these douches throwing $ at the caravan ARE making themselves a story. Was it to Trump's benefit when his supporters were the story? Negative.
Not surprised to see Hillary trying to get as far away from this possible endorsement as she can.
It's not really damming at all. Here's the key quote. It's a dig on the GOP more than a compliment.
"We would have to believe her actions would be quite different than her rhetoric. Let me put it that way," he said on ABC's "This Week" Sunday. "But on some of the Republican candidates we would -- before we could support them, we'd have to believe their actions will be quite different than the rhetoric we've heard so far."
Watched A Perfect Storm on Netflix the other night in honor of this thread. Meh....not impressed. Diane Lane was fantastic though. I would def vote for her.
Clinton Trolls Shut Down Pro-Bernie Sanders Facebook GroupsAmanda Girard | April 26, 2016
Some of the biggest pro-Bernie Sanders groups on Facebook were briefly taken down Monday evening in a targeted attack by Hillary Clinton supporters.
The groups Bernie Sanders Activists, Bernie Believers, BERNIE OR BUST, Bernie Sanders Revolutionaries, Bay Area for Bernie, Bernie Sanders 2016 — Ideas Welcome, Bernie Sanders is my HERO, and Bernie Sanders for President 2016 were all taken down in the attack. The pages in question were reported to be down for about three hours, from 9 p.m. to midnight Monday night.
Collectively, these groups are home to more than a quarter million Bernie Sanders supporters, and some have been in existence for nearly a year, having been launched shortly after the Vermont senator declared his intent to run for president in 2015.
The groups were targeted by online trolls, who posted pornographic images and reported the groups to Facebook admins. Some legitimate Bernie supporters even reported seeing images containing pedophilia, according to reporting from Heavy.com.
Erica Libenow, a Sanders supporter and member of one of the pro-Bernie groups, said, “We had what looked like a kiddie porn posted in one of our groups today. I reported that one. Seriously made me want to vomit.”
There is at least one culprit to be found in Facebook user Casey Champagne, who bragged about taking down the pages in the pro-Hillary Clinton group BROS 4 HILLARY – #GiveEmHill — though the pro-Clinton page has now also been taken down.
Other Hillary Clinton fans were cheering on Champagne’s trolling, encouraging him to try to take down Bernie Sanders’ official Facebook page. Another Facebook user openly admitted that her husband frequently reported pro-Sanders posts on Facebook in hopes that they would be taken down, saying his success rate was “about 50/50 on a good day.”
Facebook user Robert Olivarez told Champagne, “You know they all can see this post?” Champagne cavalierly responded, “You know I don’t care?”
Champagne, and possibly other Clinton supporters, essentially mass-reported content in these pro-Sanders Facebook groups claiming the content was graphically violent, pornographic, or abusive — including the reprehensible content posted by Clinton supporters themselves. Facebook’s automated systems take note of how many individuals report a particular post, and if the post is reported enough, it will be taken down. This same process applies to groups, pages, and individual user accounts.
Casey Champagne did not immediately respond to interview requests from US Uncut.
It’s still unclear if these gutter tactics are tied to Correct the Record, the pro-Hillary Clinton Super PAC that openly declared last week that it would launch a sophisticated social media campaign aimed at Bernie Sanders supporters. Correct the Record earmarked $1 million for the effort, named “Barrier Breakers 2016,” which aims to “correct” Sanders supporters who criticize Hillary Clinton on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and Instagram. However, some of Casey Champagne’s recent likes are Correct the Record, Barrier Breakers, and an anti-Sanders page called “Pragmatic Progressives.”
Comments
http://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/five-questions-about-the-clintons-and-a-uranium-company
There are a number of transactions similar to this one where money flowed to the Clinton Foundation while decisions at State were being made. Hit the old google for more info on this story and others. Again...it reeks.
1. The MOU between the Admin and Clinton to recuse herself from business where it intermingles with the Foundation. A conservative watchdog recently filed an FOIA for internal records related to any objections to her participation by career diplomats, bureaucrats, etc. To date, only one objection has ever been filed.
2. Any meaningful decision goes through multiple cabinet officers. For example, you don't sell arms without approval by the DOD/Sec of Defense. You don't do a mineral deal with Russia without Homeland Security and Interior signing off.
The one area that gave me pause on this article is around the tax disclosures. Those are problematic. But that could be lots of things, including errors by the public accounting firms, etc. I'm not sure if there's a fire under that smoke or not. But in all, the article raises questions, it doesn't draw conclusions.
I do appreciate that the author mentioned a few times about the work the the foundation does. It does tremendous work around the world for progressive causes. And you would be hard pressed to find a charity that uses a higher % of its contributions towards the actual causes, upwards of 80%.
He would make an excellent politician.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/08/source-no-coincidence-romanian-hacker-guccifer-extradited-amid-clinton-probe.html?intcmp=hpbt1
Oh Brother, Where Art Thou
Monument Men
Perfect Storm (perfect for that part)
The Men Who Stare at Goats
(a few others I can't think of now)
Excellent narrator too.
He's make a great mayor of some cool little Southern California town that serves up good margaritas.
I think Jason's assessment was right on. Dude's great at playing himself.
George Clooney Turns Spotlight on War Criminals in South Sudan
http://variety.com/2014/biz/news/george-clooney-turns-spotlight-on-war-criminals-in-south-sudan-1201280612/
George Clooney Uses Satellite Sentinel Project To Catch Poachers
https://www.looktothestars.org/news/13514-george-clooney-uses-satellite-sentinel-project-to-catch-poachers
(unless that material has been stretched and stitched?)
Up In The Air
The Descendants
The Ides of March
Goodnight and Good Luck
Oceans Eleven
Syriana
Michael Clayton
The Thin Red Line
So many! And he was good in ER and Roseanne too.
http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/joe-dem-primary-system-rigged-against-voters-663318083925?cid=playlist=480866&cid=sm_fb_mojoe
http://m.dailykos.com/story/2016/4/6/1511462/-CORRUPTION-How-Hundreds-of-Superdelegates-were-Literally-bought-by-the-Clinton-Campaign
http://ktla.com/2016/04/17/bernie-sanders-supporters-in-l-a-throw-dollar-bills-at-hillary-clintons-motorcade/
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/
Cruz: 99
Kasich: 48
Trump: 42 (<----this is the frontrunner...less endorsements then the two other shitstains)
Clinton: 490
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
No surprise Cruz is leading the GOP endorsement race, and no surprise Clinton is leading the Dem endorsement race. That's the way I'd expect the endorsements to go.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/24/politics/charles-koch-hillary-clinton-2016/index.html
Not surprised to see Hillary trying to get as far away from this possible endorsement as she can.
"We would have to believe her actions would be quite different than her rhetoric. Let me put it that way," he said on ABC's "This Week" Sunday. "But on some of the Republican candidates we would -- before we could support them, we'd have to believe their actions will be quite different than the rhetoric we've heard so far."
http://m.nydailynews.com/news/politics/king-hillary-clinton-paying-trolls-attack-people-online-article-1.2613980
Hillary Clinton now paying trolls to attack people online
http://www.businessinsider.com/clinton-pac-spends-1-million-to-correct-people-online-2016-4
This pro-Clinton super PAC is spending $1 million to 'correct' people online — and Redditors are outraged
http://usuncut.com/politics/bernie-facebook-groups-trolled/