Posted on 11/04/2016 9:31:50 AM PDT by rktman
Democratic nominee Hillary Clintons campaign chairman John Podesta said it was a major understatement when an important Clinton Foundation figure described Chelsea Clinton as not smart, a newly-leaked email reveals.
The 2012 email is from the latest batch of leaked communications put out by the online hacktivist group Wikileaks. In the email, Podesta responds to Doug Band, a former Bill Clinton assistant who helped found the Clinton Global Initiative.
Band was irate because Chelsea had apparently launched an internal investigation of the Clinton Foundations finances, and then told one of former President George W. Bushs twin daughters about it. The information had then made its way to a Republican operative. (RELATED: Chelsea Launched Internal Investigation Of Clinton Foundation)
I have heard more and more chatter of [Chelsea] and bari talking about lots of what is going on internally to people, Band complains in the exchange. Not smart.
Podestas response is brief but leaves his thoughts very clear.
You are perfecting your skills for understatement, he says.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Sounds more like Chelsea is not as corrupt as the rest of them.
At least Chelsea seems more honest than her parents.
This leak series does give her some credit for kicking back at some of the corruption. Why she tried we can’t tell.
Maybe to preserve her interests, maybe because of some bit of conscience, who knows.
She was “stupid” of course for not realizing the nature and purpose of the whole thing.
“...Chelsea had apparently launched an internal investigation of the Clinton Foundations finances...”
Maybe mom asked her to see if anyone had sticky fingers..... ha!
That’s the way I’m reading it, too.
Chelsea Clinton conducting an internal investigation of a non-profit organization is like a first-grader studying quantum physics.
Oh, he’s not saying SHE’s not smart, he’s saying its not smart t to be talking in public.
It think this merely means that Chelsea pulled a bonehead move by blathering about her investigation, not necessarily that she has a below-80 IQ.
BEST. ELECTION. EVER.
If only he would have remarked about her looks too.
*grins*
The issue she was complaining about wasn't the corruption of the Foundation itself, but the corruption of all the leeches (employees and consultants) who were ripping it off to pad their own wallets.
She really does sound like a dim bulb. Did she really think a criminal enterprise would attract honest people? LOL.
” Probably nice enough....” I’ve read some things from her time at whatever network hired her and the folks that worked near her said she’s just as nasty and spoiled as her momma. Like, DO NOT make eye contact, DO NOT address her, stay out of the way.
The speed with which it’s all happening just pins my ears back !
Here is your source—Podesta emails, of course!:
But, will it be fast enough? And, what of all the early ballots cast for the beast? Any amending allowed? In some states but, is it too much too late?
Got it, thanks .. will check it out, FRiend
“Not smart” = not on board Clinton crony criminal activities, and talking about crime family business to outsiders.
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.