Posted on 11/27/2016 7:58:56 AM PST by ColdOne
Foreign governments will be encouraged to investigate the Clinton Foundation’s finances, as many are already turning off money spigots to the scandal-scarred group, The Post has learned.
A source close to President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team told The Post that the new administration plans to pressure the US ambassadors it will name to bring up the foundation with foreign governments — and suggest they probe its financial dealings.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Sometimes, depending on the source.
His message is also that he's not pursuing the Clinton Foundation.
This is awesome - we can all believe what we want!
Btw, can I see a list of your unwritten rules? Yukyuk. To be honest, you sound like the president of some homeowners association. Funny stuff. I asked you a question, you evade it, then deny doing that and then tell me I made a false statement. LOL! Great stuff. See the tagline, you defined it el perfecto.
Where did you hear that?
I’d like to research that further.
By signaling to the Clinton Foundation’s biggest victims that he wants their input, Trump is absolutely indicating that his justice dept will pursue the CF.
I didn’t make the rule about reading threads. I became acquainted with it over time. It makes sense, though. If you jump into the middle, or the end, of a thread, you may fail to contribute anything of value, by virtue of having no clue as to what was previously discussed.
I, for one, think ambiguous and contradictory messages from the leader of the free world can only serve us well.
When has Trump said the Clinton Foundation is off the table?
When has he used those exact words? I can't say.
I do know that he's sent his people out to say
“I think when the president-elect who’s also the head of your party … tells you before he’s even inaugurated he doesn’t wish to pursue these charges, it sends a very strong message, tone and content, to the members,” Kellyanne Conway told the hosts of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe"
You can lawyer this all you want but his message has been that Hillary's off the hook.
This is exactly the problem with contradictory and ambiguous messages - every one can think whatever they want.
That's a great strategy when you're a candidate, but it will be problematic when the world starts to take your statements seriously.
So when it comes to Hillary herself, Trump says there’s been no decision, and Conway says there has.
I’ll go with Trump on this one.
Neither of them has ever hinted, even obliquely, that the Clinton Foundation is off the hook. (This is in part due to the fact that the FBI still has an open investigation into the CF.) But the notice to the countries the CF has principally defrauded tells us where that’s headed.
Hobestly, some supposed conservatives are so down on Trump, you’d think they were rooting for Hillary.
See the tagline.
How many unwritten rules are there? And do any pertain to being deceptive and or evasive?
I’ll go with Trump on this one.
Neither of them has ever hinted, even obliquely, that the Clinton Foundation is off the hook.
Whatever gets you through the night...
If your definition of ‘evasive’ is someone who doesn’t repeat what they’ve already said just because you command them to repeat it, your definition is worthless.
Bol. That’s one way to respond to facts.
I like the idea but why don’t “sources close to President-Elect Trump” keep their mouths shut till he’s inaugurated? Is there any benefit to this being publicized at this time?
Yep, evasive and deceptive.
You use those words the way a control freak would—manipulatively, as a means of attempting to force others to obey your commands.
I haven’t commanded you to obey anything. I even told you way back you’re not required to answer questions. It’s all there. And you claiming I’m forcing people to “obey my commands” hit my funny bone hard. Comedy gold. That’s the funniest damn thing I’ve heard all day.
You vacillate. At one point you acknowledge people aren’t required to obey your commands. But a few posts later you start calling them evasive and deceptive if they don’t—and you trollishly keep this going for several posts.
Ultimately, called on it, you go back to admitting that people aren’t your subjwcts, who must answer to your demands or be manipulatively labeled for noncompliance.
subjects
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.