Bill, Hillary and the gift that keeps on grifting

Lowell Sun ^ | August 30 | Peter Lucas

[luke1825]

The surprise is not that so many people had to pay to get Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's attention, but how many got out the door without paying anything at all.

How did these deadbeats beat the system? Heads should roll over that one.

Consider that, according to the Associated Press, at least 85 of 154 people from private interests who met or had phone conversations with Clinton while she headed the State Department, donated substantial funds to the Clinton's charitable foundation.

[Quality_Not_Quantity]

Chlamydia?

[Liz]

NO SURPRISE THE EPI-PEN MFG CONTRIBUTED TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION. USED BY CHILDREN AT RISK, the price SOARED FROM 100 to 600 DOLLARS.

And there's more....much more.

<><> Senate lobbying records show that Mylan spent more than $2 million on Washington lobbying in 2015. In addition, the company’s political action committee has distributed more than $79,500 in contributions for the 2016 election cycle, according to campaign-finance records available at OpenSecrets.org.

<><> The lobbying disclosure forms tell a remarkably bipartisan story. Mylan paid $40,000 to hire Scott Evertz, who had been director of AIDS policy in the George W. Bush administration.

<><>It paid $70,000 to the Glover Park Group; that bought the services of Joel Johnson, who is a former senior aide to President Bill Clinton, and of Gregg Rothschild, who had been chief counsel to Democratic Rep. John Dingell, longtime chairman of the House Commerce Committee.

<><> Mylan paid $240,000 to a firm called West Front Strategies, whose partners include Malloy McDaniel, a former policy adviser to Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

<><> Mylan political action committee gave $7,500 to Sen. Chuck Schumer’s campaign for the 2016 cycle and $3,500 in the 2010 cycle, according to the Open Secrets records.

<><> Mylan’s CEO, Heather Bresch, daughter of a Democratic US senator from West Virginia Joe Manchin also cashed in, getting a humongous salary increase.

<><> When she recently spoke with The New York Times, Bresch listed among her top accomplishments, the passage of a federal law, the Generic Drug User Fee Amendments of 2012, requiring increased inspections of overseas drug manufacturers.

THIS JUST IN---Hillary Clinton issued a statement “calling on Mylan to immediately reduce the price of EpiPens.”

(hat tip Ira Stoll---NY Post op-ed)

[Louis Foxwell]

Their links to the grifter clan, The Travelers, a xenophobic gypsy cult, has been well documented. Much has been scrubbed. As should be expected Google has nothing.
That her Little Rock supporters use the name demonstrates the brazen character of her campaign.

[Ouderkirk]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grifter#See_also

[Ouderkirk]

Check the “see also” list there...you will find it interesting

[Liz]

In addition to the highly visible Clinton Global Initiative, there are several separate Clinton foundations that maintain their own revenue
streams. All these entities maintain separate operations for the Clintons’ pay-to-play global racketeering operations:

<><>the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI),

<><>the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton (BHCC) Foundation,

<><>the Clinton Foundation Hong Kong,

<><> William J. Clinton Foundation Charitable Trust (Kenya),

<><>William J. Clinton Foundation Charitable Trust (UK),

<><> the Clinton Foundation Insalingsstiftelse (Sweden).

<><> the Clinton/Guistra Partnership, Canada.

[Liz]

The C/F got IRS’ okay to raise funds for the Arkansas Clinton Library....not as a global “do-good.” Certainly not approved as a global money-raking criminal pay- to-play organization.

---

<><> ITEM-—Wall Street whistleblower Charles Ortel quoted a former managing director of Dillon, Read & Co thusly: “under New York law, tax authorities dont have to show criminal intent to get convictions against foundation officials.”

” Authorities need only show that the Clinton Foundation filed materially misleading financial information but kept on fundraising for a myriad of do-good projects.”

<><> ITEM-—The criminal element’s MO to hide larger crimes is to falsify official documents. =========================================

<><> ITEM——The legal culpability of a tax-free “charity” consists of:

<><> soliciting and taking money, and,

<><> showing how they spend it.

REPORT MAIL FRAUD AND ELECTRONIC FRAUD HERE:

MAIL FRAUD https://postalinspectors.uspis.gov/contactUs/filecomplaint.aspx

ELECTRONIC FRAUD-—FBI electronic fraud unit—FBI tip page

[Liz]

Hillary Clinton has a demonstrated record of showing contempt for the rule of law:

<><> • As a top govt official, she refused to tell the truth about the deadly Benghazi terrorist attack that took place on her watch

<><> •She violated the law and avoided accountability by using secret email accounts as Secretary of State

<><> •She sold out her office to benefit the so-called Clinton “charity” (The Clinton Corruption Foundation).

And isn’t it amazing? Obama knew NOTHING about all of this (cue laugh machine).

[Buckeye McFrog]

Sadly this goes way beyond the Clintons.
At this point the Fed Gov is little more than a
protection racket. RINOS are in on it too.

[Liz]

No question....

..... .and remember “earmarks”...banned b/c of the looting and pillaging ....

.....hundreds of millions “earmarked for the children” to some phony group. back home in the district.

[DAVEY CROCKETT]

Your post proves to me we have no idea how much money the Clintons have stolen! I am not in a place right now to research this but someone should! The numbers don’t add up to what they are saying!

[Liz]

That's for sure.....read on.

HOW RICH ARE THEY? At first glance, the Clintons astounding honoraria and humongous Foundation donations seem to provide the bulk of the couples mega income.

Bills honoraria increased dramatically pocketing some $50 million during Hillarys four-year term as Secretary of State....including an Irish scholarship fund, a Korean conglomerate, and, a Nigerian newspaper company......each of whom paid Clinton more than half a million dollars for a single speech.

The Wash/Post reports Hillary earned $11.7 million for 51 speeches since Jan 2014.....she pocketed an astonishing $625,000 for two speeches in one day.

===============================================

I firmly believe the Clinton Foundations gigantic Foundation donors, and their astonishing blizzard of speaking honoraria, are a smoke screen for their secret wealth....and the way they make billions sub rosa....intertwining their vaunted do-goodism and their multiple tax-paid public offices.

The calculated Clintons have sought to branch out into other business activities. All of that is kept under wraps. Very little is known about the exact nature and financial worth of Bill and Hillarys non-speech business interests.

Reports keep surfacing indicating the Clintons were party to multi/billion dollar Mideast arms deals....Kazakhstan uranium mines....and Haitian gold mines...Libyan oil deals....telecom businesses, deals w/ financial powerhouses like Teneo, Goldman Sachs.....etc etc etc.

THE CON ARTIST CLINTONS GRABBED EVERYTHNG THAT WASNT NAILED DOWN Lucrative business interests were cunningly intertwined w/ the Foundations transparent do-good activities....enabled by Hillarys catbird seat at the State Dept.

The Clintons apparently raised billions from their foundation activities and their political campaigns........but that does not include monies pouring in from the various lucrative global business ventures.

There's also interest accrued, safe deposit boxes, real estate assets, passive income on which they pay no taxes, income from Chelsea's hubbys hedge fund, monies invested in Goldman Sachs, interest in financial powerhouse Teneo..... etc etc etc.......

[red-dawg]

[timestax]

[timestax]

[DAVEY CROCKETT]

Good lord we have got to get them out of our government! And prosecut them, they have corrupted the world.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Some have called this pay for play which, although not illegal, should certainly be so.

It certainly is illegal:

Article 1 Section 9:

No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state

Democrats used to prattle about “the appearance of impropriety,” which in reality boiled down to the idea that the cartel known as wire service journalism can veto any appointment by a Republican, simply by publishing insinuations about them. That was an overreach.

But in any instance where the Secretary of State suffers an organization in which she is a principal to accept gifts or payments, the “appearance of impropriety” is impropriety. No law affirmatively allowing it equals no right to do it. According to the Constitution, anyone who is employed by the government or holds a position of trust (such as being the spouse of the Secretary of State?) who wants to accept any substantive payment or position of authority or respect from a foreign government must get prior approval of Congress. Not just a one-time Senate confirmation when such potential foreign government influence is bruited about in the abstract, but an affirmative vote of both bodies of Congress before each occasion of such.

We the people must understand that, from the top of the Federal government - the POtUS, both branches of Congress, down through the legislatures of all of our states, our officials have failed to enforce this provision of the Constitution. The President should never have allowed such gross impropriety in a cabinet official under his direct supervision. The Congress should have investigated, and found the Secretary of State in contempt for proceeding in such an unseemly way. And our state legislatures should have used their plenary power

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector. (Article II Section 1)

to keep the name of anyone with such a record off the ballot in their states.

It is all up the the public at this point. We can reject Hillary Clinton’s candidacy out of hand, or we can delegitimate the idea of democratic elections.