Doll Is Mine wrote:

Youseff wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:It's nonsense. Hillary was Secretary of State. All she did was meet with people.

what about the other part.

It's a non-story, and quite frankly, I don't think most people even care. But I'll say this, calling for the Foundation to shut down for political reasons is disgusting. The Foundation helps so many children around the world and we need to stop trying to make it out to be some corrupt scheme to make the Clintons rich.

Well, they could just remove themselves from the operation entirely.

Oh wait.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Youseff wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:It's nonsense. Hillary was Secretary of State. All she did was meet with people.

what about the other part.

It's a non-story, and quite frankly, I don't think most people even care. But I'll say this, calling for the Foundation to shut down for political reasons is disgusting. The Foundation helps so many children around the world and we need to stop trying to make it out to be some corrupt scheme to make the Clintons rich.

Well, they could just remove themselves from the operation entirely.

Oh wait.

Hillary has. But why should Bill and Chelsea, both of whom genuinely enjoy being part of it.

what is the part that they 'got' though? by and large they received good publicity, some medals, a couple calls to smooth things over, etc. Many times you simply let them yap at you for a while and they feel better about themselves.

Then I read the Ap article itself and found a couple of the examples a little useless and not really 'corruption'. The Yunus thing, for example...he lost his post because the Bangladeshi government that has become increasingly authoritarian and sought to put him in prison. there were protests over it, and we were on his side. he also was one of the big microloan guys, which is something the Clinton Foundation was big into (you probably saw the commercials). He probably went to her because of this, plus the US being the most powerful nation in the world, and all he basically got was that they said 'that's wrong that they did that, not much we can do for ya buddy'. I guess I just don't see where the big controversy came in...State would've likely had a small weigh in on a noble peace prize winner being pursued by his government whether the guy donated money to the Clinton Foundation or not.

i agree it doesn't look good but this basically comes down to whether you do or you don't believe Hillary Clinton. If you don't, you won't believe the CF affected her time at State. If you do, you likely will.

edit: I'm sure there is something fishy that, were I on the other side, I'd say 'look at this!'. I don't think anything rises to the level of corruption worthy of throwing the book at her, though.

Yeah, the problem with the Pubs' argument that it was "pay for play" is there doesn't appear to be any "play."

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Youseff wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:It's nonsense. Hillary was Secretary of State. All she did was meet with people.

what about the other part.

It's a non-story, and quite frankly, I don't think most people even care. But I'll say this, calling for the Foundation to shut down for political reasons is disgusting. The Foundation helps so many children around the world and we need to stop trying to make it out to be some corrupt scheme to make the Clintons rich.

Well, they could just remove themselves from the operation entirely.

Oh wait.

Well, she was a part of it for 2 years.

My problem with this is that it's going to cause the Foundation to shut down for political reasons. They're already going to stop the foreign and corporate donations. That's a lot of money that could go to people in need.

I just think it's disgusting.

The article says 85 of 154 non-governmental meetings. That's pretty misleading. She was obviously extremely busy as SOS. It could very well be that she didn't take what little extra time she had to meet with anyone that wasn't involved with her charity.

That said, it looks terrible and there's enough smoke in a variety of places with the foundation that it's pretty hard to believe she wasn't either directly or indirectly affected by the money flow. This is why things need to be changed and why I'm disappointed that the next 8 years probably won't see much change in this area. Some publicly financed election system seems like a much better way to go. Never happen though.

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Youseff wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:It's nonsense. Hillary was Secretary of State. All she did was meet with people.

what about the other part.

It's a non-story, and quite frankly, I don't think most people even care. But I'll say this, calling for the Foundation to shut down for political reasons is disgusting. The Foundation helps so many children around the world and we need to stop trying to make it out to be some corrupt scheme to make the Clintons rich.

it's certainly a story. get ready to hear about it everyday for the next 5 or 8 years. you can pretend to be a Clinton surrogate on the board if you wan't but I find it hard to believe you don't think the optics of it warrant a story.

there is already plenty of published evidence of impropriety. just google it

The newly obtained Abedin emails also contain a memorandum sent to Cheryl Mills from State Department White House liaison Laura Pena revealing that Rajiv Fernando was proposed for his controversial appointment to the sensitive International Security Advisory Board as early as June 2009. Fernando was not actually appointed until 2011, and his appointment raised a firestorm because, according to an ABC News report, “he had no obvious experience in the field.” Fernando donated $1 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Doll Is Mine wrote:My problem with this is that it's going to cause the Foundation to shut down for political reasons. They're already going to stop the foreign and corporate donations. That's a lot of money that could go to people in need.

I just think it's disgusting.

I see your point. However, you could also point out that no one forced Hillary to run for President. Deciding to run for high political office has all kinds of consequences for you and your family and the things your family is involved with and compromising the foundation like that is inevitable. If Hillary really wanted the Clinton foundation to be as effective an organization as it could be, she'd not have run for any political office or served as secretary of state.

Houshphandzadeh wrote:I think we've already seen over the past month that no one not already voting for Trump really cares about this, or at least, that they (including me) accept it as part of the 'lesser evil' thing, so not sure if this will make much of a difference

I do think it's interesting that our Philly DA Seth Williams is about to lose his post over quid pro quo infractions but it will hardly dent a presidential candidate

I mean...Williams took gifts like week long beach front vacations, a $45,000 roof, sideline eagles tickets. It's not like he was taking those and funneling them to the Gates Foundation.

I'm not passing judgment on Clinton's actions here but Williams definitely fits the stereotypical money for favors arrangement.

pacino wrote:what is the part that they 'got' though? by and large they received good publicity, some medals, a couple calls to smooth things over, etc. Many times you simply let them yap at you for a while and they feel better about themselves.

so the idea is that Hillary is so wily she makes these people feel like they got a favor in return for their cash but doesn't actually deliver?

Houshphandzadeh wrote:there is already plenty of published evidence of impropriety. just google it

The newly obtained Abedin emails also contain a memorandum sent to Cheryl Mills from State Department White House liaison Laura Pena revealing that Rajiv Fernando was proposed for his controversial appointment to the sensitive International Security Advisory Board as early as June 2009. Fernando was not actually appointed until 2011, and his appointment raised a firestorm because, according to an ABC News report, “he had no obvious experience in the field.” Fernando donated $1 million to the Clinton Foundation.

this was debunked like two months ago, he is on board of the American Security Project (google it!). his knowledge in financial systems and security is a pretty important thing to have on a board such as that. . it has become incredibly important with fighting terrorism, for example.

Housh is a Breitbart reader?

abc: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton- ... d=39710624

it doesn't matter if you can construe some rationalization for the appointment. a guy gives a ton of money to a Clinton organization and then gets a post in Clinton's department. that's corruption

Are you voting for Trump, housh?

it's not 'some rationalization', it's how he got a top secret clearance.

Doll Is Mine wrote:Are you voting for Trump, housh?

come on

i would assume he's either voting Stein, no one, or a begrudging Clinton

American businessman makes donations to political campaigns (you don't have to bother even looking at the Foundation; he donated directly to HRC's campaign in 2008) and is given a political appointment once the candidate is in a position to give it.

How is this different from the way our political system has been run forever, e.g., with ambassador positions? Is it because the contributor's last name ends with a vowel? He's an American and if his name were, say, Paulson or Rubin or Kennedy -- did you know FDR appointed Joe Kennedy as head of the SEC? -- would this be an issue?

so now I'm a racist. you guys are something else