Posted on 09/06/2016 12:08:11 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
Bill Clinton sounds creepy when he opens his mouth these days.
Hillary could not even remember the Rose Law Firm records. Did she have trauma to the head at that time too?
(Spit) Another Clinton con game. The fact is there's several OTHER Clinton foundations that have
(a) their own revenue streams, and,
(b) their own fund-raising mechanisms.
Foreign govt's will still have unlimited access to the Clintons and exert influence on US govt policy w/ do-good bribes.
In addition to the highly visible Clinton Global Initiative, these separate Clinton foundations 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),
<><> the Clinton/Guistra Partnership, Canada.
(TAPPED FOR CLOSURE)
<><>William J. Clinton Foundation Charitable Trust (UK),
<><> the Clinton Foundation Insalingsstiftelse (Sweden).
Who is going to raise the money for the Clintons to pay off the media. They already ordered a big jet to cart those media people around and wine and dine them. Someone has to take care of the Clinton Big Democrat Machine media.
Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is taking some rhetorical sniper fire for her charitable foundation, which received large contributions from several nations while she was secretary of State.The Washington Post, New York Times, Wall Street Journal and others have hinted at impropriety on two levels
1) A potential presidential candidate becomes beholden to certain foreign nations.
2) A Secretary of State whose private foundation grows in prestige from foreign donations, while those same nations lobby the State Department for special treatment on human rights.
Both questions merit vigorous exploration, but for two of the Clinton Foundations donor nations theres a third, perhaps more troubling, specter: money laundering tax dollars.
Algeria and the Dominican Republican each contributed to the Clinton Foundation, and both are recipients of U.S. development aid.
In 2010, Secretary Clintons foundation received $500,000 from Algeria designated to help Haiti in the aftermath of an earthquake. But the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) reports that Algeria received from U.S. taxpayers a total of $8.58 million in development assistance that same year three-quarters of it as emergency response money.
At the same time, as the Post reports, Algeria spent another $422,097 lobbying the U.S. government, largely to take the heat off for human rights abuses in the 99% Sunni Islamic North African country.
Hillary's charity took major donations from dirt-poor nations---Hillary Clintons charity took major donations from Algeria and the Dominican Republic while they received U.S. development aid from American taxpayers.
So, in effect, U.S. taxpayers gave Algeria money to pressure us to stop hassling it about human rights, and we also gave Algeria money to curry favor with Madame Secretary by buffing the global reputation of Hillary Clintons private foundation. (This is not to minimize any good work that the Clinton Foundation may have done in Haiti. Thats irrelevant to this question.)
The real issue: Should needy nations like Algeria make contributions to other needy nations, channeled through the charitable foundation of the sitting U.S. secretary of State, while needy nation #1 is also lobbying us over human rights abuses all with U.S. taxpayer dollars?
Meanwhile, the perennially impoverished Dominican Republic (DR) also donated to the Clinton Foundation during Hillarys stint at State. Meanwhile in 2010 the D/R received $35.52 million in U.S. development aid.
No matter what kind of accounting gymnastics one might perform, the fact of the matter is that U.S. taxpayers gave the DR and Algeria money that they then channelled to, or through, the Clinton Foundation.
There are, certainly, more troubles soon to emerge for a presidential hopeful with a foundation laid on such shifting sands of geostrategic relationships.
For example, Ukraines second-richest billionaire, Victor Pinchuk, a steel king whose wealth flows from trade with Russia, is also a major donor to the Clinton Foundation. When President Hillary Clinton takes the 3 a.m. phone call from Mr. Pinchuk, how will she tell him that the United States stands with those who want an independent Ukraine, rather than a Russian puppet?
By Scott Ott---co-hosts a news, commentary and humor show called Trifecta on PJTV.
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/02/26/hillarys-laundromat-clinton-foundation-got-cash-from-u-s-development-aid-recipient-nations/
No conflict here. Nothing to see. MOVE ALONG PEOPLE.
The Clintons need to be charged under RICO, among other things.
Trump does not owe people the way Hillary does.
You can argue about it but the Republic ended with the supreme Court decision on gay marriage . The States are now mere conduits for Fed rules and money. n
But, but, but Trump contributed to the campaign of FL Republican AG Pam Bondi. Have we no decency? /s
Looks like our ‘State Department’ was training ISIS leaders too...
SIS Military Commander Was Trained by State Department as Recently as 2014
<><>the panoply of e-mail scandals;
<><> compromising L/E to evade prosecution;
<><> the reckless mishandling of classified information
<><> exposing our national-defense secrets to hostile powers;
<><>the mass destruction of 1000's of government records after Congress requested them;
<><>the obstruction of government investigations;
<><>the serial lies to Congress and to the public;
<><>the shocking failure to provide security for Americans stationed in Benghazi;
<><> making no attempt to rescue Americans during the terrorist siege in Benghazi;
<><>lying to Americans and to murdered Americans' families about the attack's cause;
<><> lying about a video to cover inaction in Benghazi;
<><> the trumping up of a prosecution against the video producer;
<><> unbecoming conduct by scapegoating a video producer;
<><>the Clinton Foundation corruption visited on the State Dept;
<><> the sale of State Dept influence for foundation donations;
<><> perks, privileges and lucrative favors for shady donors at the expense of national security,
<><> the use of the State Department as an arm of the Clinton pay-to-play enterprise;
<><> profiting by stealing State Dept data belonging to the citizenry.
<><> rampant cronyism;
<><> using official State Dept activities to advance cronies personal businesses;
<><> Using the State Dept budget as a personal ATM;
<><> turning the State Dept into a racketeering enterprise;
<><> destroying govt properety;
<><> conducting political activites on govt time.
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.