Would the clintoons back off if enough money was offered? The one had plenty of money to buy silence. This never happens in politics (money), or was something discovered on the clintoons which bought silence? Don't know here. Many questions.
No. First of all, I have never thought the Clintons were particular interested in money. They are power and influence driven. Second of all, any money that was offered them for silence would be dwarfed by the money (and power and influence) they would both receive if Hillary were POTUS. Thirdly, the information would have been leaked by someone out of spite or retribution.
“Would the clintoons back off if enough money was offered?”
No, but they would if bodily harm was threatened to their daughter.
They didn’t use carrots; they used sticks. They killed Bill Clinton’s good friend Bill Gwatney to scare him off, after Gwatney had agreed to present a petititon at the DNC Convention, carrying out the intended plan to reveal Obama’s ineligibility at the Convention.
Remember the “Recreate ‘68”? How there were going to be all these subversives at the Convention? Those were to scare off Gwatney’s wife if she decided to carry out her husband’s wishes at the Convention, rather than heed the warning when both Gwatney and Stephanie Tubbs (who agreed to present the petition after Gwatney died and shortly thereafter died of “an aneurysm” that last week before the convention).
See what I just posted, at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2885916/posts?page=116#116
There is a much, much bigger story here than just - giggle - “birtherism”. Read any of the stuff at Ulsterman’s report - especially concerning Kam Kuwata, for instance, and Diane Feinstein.... (Google for links; they’re not allowed here) and you will see details which - like the details regarding the Osama assassination - have been vindicated over time. We’ve got a civil war within the democratic party - dueling mafias, it seems.
It is totally lawless.
And it is deadly.