HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Divernan » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 27 Next »

Divernan

Profile Information

Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 12,104

Journal Archives

Clinton Foundation will broker the deal for a generous percentage!

The Clinton Foundation's theme song should be Les Miserables' Master of the House.

Master of the house
Doling out the charm
Ready with a handshake
And an open palm
Tells a saucy tale
Makes a little stir
1 percent appreciates a bon-viveur
Glad to do a friend a favor
Doesn't cost me to be nice
But nothing gets you nothing
Everything has got a little price!

Master of the house
Keeper of the zoo
Ready to relieve 'em
Of a $mil or two
Skimming off the top
Making up the weight
Pickin' up their knick-knacks
When they can't see straight
Everybody loves a landlord
Everybody's bosom friend
I do whatever pleases
Jesus! Won't I bleed 'em in the end!

Residents are more than welcome
Bridal suite is occupied
Reasonable charges
Plus some little extras on the side!

Charge 'em for the lice
Extra for the mice
Two percent for looking in the mirror twice
Here a little slice
There a little cut
Three percent for sleeping with the window shut
When it comes to fixing prices
There are a lot of tricks he knows
How it all increases
All those bits and pieces
Jesus! It's amazing how it grows!

Yup. The Clinton Global Initiative shoehorned Rodham into a sweet deal!

From the OP's link:

In interviews with The Washington Post, both Rodham and the chief executive of Delaware-based VCS Mining said they were introduced at a meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative — an offshoot of the Clinton Foundation that critics have long alleged invites a blurring of its charitable mission with the business interests of Bill and Hillary Clinton and their corporate donors.


What next, a similar lucrative deal for Chelsea's ex-convict father in law? He still owes over $9 million to the victims of the frauds for which he was convicted and served time.

You put yourself up for president, you ask to be judged!

As you full well realize from reading my post to which you responded, I did allow for varying situations, such as financial welfare of children and/or the cheated on spouse. Anyone who puts themselves up to run for president realizes they will be judged on their past actions and the values by which they live.

Tell me, hypothetically, if you had a daughter or a sister with HRC's intelligence and superior education(Yale Law degree), and demonstrated ability to make more money than her husband, would you encourage her to stay with a serial adulterous husband who not only repeatedly cheated on her, but then lied to her about it, and set her up to be humiliated on a national and international level?

I wouldn't! The psychological abuse of decades of rejection (You're not enough woman for me, I HAD to find other women) has shaped her personality, just as surely as when a parent psychologically rejects and humiliates their child. She projects out her decades of repressed anger (at the most basic betrayal a woman can experience) onto her husband's sexual victims, her political opponents (her list keeping with the intent of wreaking revenge), and pushing bloodthirsty, but oh-so-profitable military solutions to complex political problems.

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/14401-hillary-clintons-legacy-as-secretary-of-state

Hillary Clinton leaves her position as Secretary of State with a legacy of supporting autocratic regimes and occupation armies, opposing enforcement of international humanitarian law, undermining arms control and defending military solutions to complex political problems(writes Truthout's Stephen Zunes, describing her complicity in the murder of thousands, most notably in Libya and Syria.)

She was appointed to her position following eight years in the US Senate, during which she became an outspoken supporter of the invasion and occupation of Iraq, lied about Iraq's military capabilities to frighten the public into supporting the illegal war, unleashed repeated attacks against the United Nations, opposed restrictions on land mines and cluster bombs, defended war crimes by allied right-wing governments and largely embraced Bush's unilateralist agenda.

“During the Arab Spring, Clinton pushed for stronger US support for pro-Western dictators in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and Bahrain, as well as the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara,” Zunes continues. “She was a major proponent of NATO’s military intervention in Libya’s civil war and has encouraged a more active US role in the Syrian conflict.”

“We came, we saw, he died,” Clinton joked in response to the barbaric murder
of deposed Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi at the hands of the CIA’s cutthroat (and beheading) mercenaries. Her sneering comment should not come as a surprise, however. In October, 2011, she openly called for his assassination. “This is Libya’s moment. This is Libya’s victory. The future belongs to you,” Clinton said during a visit to the embattled country. “Libya’s victory” resulted in the murder of 30,000 Libyans, most innocent men, women, and children.



And she promotes herself as a champion of women & children, NOW, but not way back.

There's that infamous case in Arkansas where she got her client whom she believed guilty of raping a 12 year old girl off for several months "time served" after the prosecution lost a piece of evidence. Specifically the lab tested a piece of the girl's underpants and matched results to the accused, but then lost the piece of cloth. Years later Hillary laughed about the case in an interview, to the effect that her client passed a lie detector test, which forever destroyed any faith she had in lie detectors.

She squandered a free clinic's limited funds to fly from Arkansas to New York,to get a letter from a hired gun medical expert to intimidate the Arkansas local yokel DA into settling the case for lesser included charges. And I repeat, later she laughed about it.

Here's an article which thoroughly details this ugly, ugly incident:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelkrauss/2014/06/26/hillary-rodham-clinton-and-the-ethics-of-a-rape-defense/

A few excerpts:
The victim, then a twelve year old girl, was raped by two adult men. She had had no sexual experience before the assault. She spent five days in a coma, months recovering from the beating that accompanied the rape, and over ten years in therapy. At first, she failed a polygraph test administered to her by police, because she didn’t understand a sex-related question posed to her. Once that question was explained, she passed the test. The victim then positively identified her two attackers through one-way glass, and they were arrested. A medical examination was consistent with rape, and police recovered a pair of men’s undershorts containing biological evidence at the scene of the crime.

Arkansas reporter Roy Reed, while researching an article on the Clintons for Esquire years ago (the article was never published), taped an interview with Mrs. Clinton. The Daily Beast obtained a copy. On the tapes Mrs. Clinton, who interestingly speaks with a Southern drawl, appears to acknowledge that she was aware of her client’s guilt, brags about successfully getting the only piece of physical evidence (the undershorts) ruled inadmissible, and laughs about it all whimsically. To wit:

“He took a lie detector test. I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs,” Clinton says on the recording, while chuckling;

W/ Clintons, it's always:"2 for the price of 1" & that's no bargain.

Except for their corporate/One Percent/Wall Street backers/puppet masters. - oh, and let us not forget the foreign governments which have "donated" to the boutique Clinton Family Foundation. One hand washes the other in all the Clinton entanglements.

And aside from all the critical and major policies at stake where the Clintons owe their allegiance to the aforesaid elites (like Keystone Pipeline, TPP and SCOTUS appointments), there's always that cringe one feels at the thought of Bill back in the White House - as in a new verse to an old song,

"Mothers, don't let your daughters grow up to be White House interns."

HRC's corporate donors will call in their quid pro quos on SCOTUS appointments.

HRC's supporters on DU seem to believe their strongest argument for her candidacy is:

Oh!, Oh! But what about SCOTUS?

It is precisely because SCOTUS appointments are so important that all of the quid pro quos purchased via millions and millions in corporate & Wall Street sponsorship for her speeches and the millions and millions of "donations" cough/bribes/cough to the boutique Clinton Family Foundation by aforesaid corporations and foreign countries, will be called in when it comes to SCOTUS appointments.

No way in hell would these power houses stand for HRC appointing any Justice who might agree to reverse SCOTUS's rulings in:
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) the Supreme Court of the United States held that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited under the First Amendment, overruling Austin (1990) and partly overruling McConnell (2003).

Western Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Attorney General of Montana (2012). U.S. Supreme Court summary reversal of a decision by the Montana Supreme Court holding that Citizens United did not preclude a Montana state law prohibiting corporate spending in elections.

HRC's corporate donors will call in their quid pro quos on SCOTUS appointments.

HRC's supporters on DU seem to believe their strongest argument for her candidacy is:

Oh!, Oh! But what about SCOTUS?

It is precisely because SCOTUS appointments are so important that all of the quid pro quos purchased via millions and millions in corporate & Wall Street sponsorship for her speeches and the millions and millions of "donations" cough/bribes/cough to the boutique Clinton Family Foundation by aforesaid corporations and foreign countries, will be called in when it comes to SCOTUS appointments.

No way in hell would these power houses stand for HRC appointing any Justice who might agree to reverse SCOTUS's rulings in:
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) the Supreme Court of the United States held that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited under the First Amendment, overruling Austin (1990) and partly overruling McConnell (2003).

Western Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Attorney General of Montana (2012). U.S. Supreme Court summary reversal of a decision by the Montana Supreme Court holding that Citizens United did not preclude a Montana state law prohibiting corporate spending in elections.

Now that Scaife is dead, Tribune Review is pushing Webb, not Clinton

When uber-conservative, multi-millionaire Richard Scaife was alive, (very old and a bit senile, but still alive) Hill & Bill sucked up to him so hard that Bill got contributions to his boutique, family owned "non-profit" which subsidizes the Clintons' 5 star life style and Hillary got Scaife's endorsement in the 2008 primary in the newspaper Scaife owned and published, The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. One had to wonder what on earth quid pro quo Hillary offered to win over the extremely conservative Scaife. Now Scaife is gone (with a lovely eulogy by Bill at the memorial service) and also gone with the wind is any endorsement of HRC by the paper formerly owned by Scaife.

It was delightful to see in today's Trib-Review a very long, detailed and glowing article about Jim Webb. They like him - they really like him! And that's because he's pretty conservative for a Democrat. What I'm delighted about is that he and other Dems, including Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley, are expressing interest in making our primary a horse race and not a coronation.
Former Senator Webb explores presidential bid, tests populist message


WASHINGTON — Jim Webb's parents taught him early what it means to be a leader. “Different families have different discussions at the dinner table,” he said. “Ours was how you lead people; how do you take care of people?” Those talks typically culminated in this question: “What kind of leader do you want — a leader who will make you do something, or make you want to do something?” he told the Tribune-Review in an interview on Capitol Hill. He knew then that his life's calling was “this alternating cycle of public service and independent entrepreneurship.”

Webb, 69, the former senator from Virginia, is pondering whether he can gain the support necessary to make a successful run in 2016 for the Democratic nomination for president.
***************************
Then Webb became the first potential 2016 presidential candidate to form an exploratory committee, in November. His populist style differs from other Democrats who might seek the party's nomination by putting forth sharp anti-Wall Street, anti-Koch brothers rhetoric. “This is not ‘anti-Wall Street' for me,” he said. “We have to grow our economy for people to have successful lives, but at the same time, we have to be fair.”
He is clear that he would never vote to increase taxes on “ordinary earned salary income, no matter what the level is, that is fairly earned.” But he questions income such as capital gains, “where you can be making millions of dollars off of stock sales and pay a lower tax rate than the firefighters putting their lives on the line.”


Read more: http://triblive.com/politics/politicalheadlines/7948450-74/webb-former-populist#ixzz3UUDMTifL
Follow us: @triblive on Twitter | triblive on Facebook

How conservative was Scaife? His was the money behind that "vast right-wing conspiracy" HRC was once so upset about. Here are just a few examples from a lengthy Washington Post article:

Mr. Scaife donated millions to such tea party-friendly groups as FreedomWorks, known for its anti-union campaigns and calls for reducing government regulation of business, privatizing Social Security and establishing English as the official language of the United States.

He was a major underwriter of the American Spectator magazine’s Arkansas Project to find evidence of financial and personal misdeeds by the Clintons in the 1990s. The effort included David Brock’s magazine story containing allegations from four Arkansas state troopers that they helped procure women for then-Gov. Bill Clinton.

Most notably, Mr. Scaife personally hired a freelance writer to try to establish that either President Clinton or then-first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton was instrumental in the death of Deputy White House Counsel Vincent W. Foster Jr. in 1993. Foster, a former law-firm partner of the first lady, was found dead from a gunshot wound to the mouth in Fort Marcy Park in Fairfax County.

Three investigations, including one in 1997 by Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr, a luminary in the conservative firmament, ruled the death a suicide. Mr. Scaife was unpersuaded. In 1998, he told George magazine editor in chief John F. Kennedy Jr. that the Foster death was “the Rosetta stone to the Clinton administration,” referring to the ancient Egyptian stone used to decipher hieroglyphics, and that Bill Clinton “can order people done away with at his will. He’s got the entire federal government behind him.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/richard-mellon-scaife-billionaire-famous-for-attacks-against-bill-clinton-has-died/2014/07/04/9e2fcace-458c-11e3-bf0c-cebf37c6f484_story.html





Diane Rehm & her distinguished guests back you up 100%, whereisjustice

I refer everyone to this video of this past week's Friday News Roundup on NPR/Diane Rehm, with her distinguished guests

(1) John Dickerson chief political correspondent for Slate magazine and political director for CBS. Author of "On Her Trail: My Mother, Nancy Dickerson, TV News' First Woman Star."
(2) John Prideaux washington correspondent, The Economist.
(3) Karen Tumulty national political reporter, The Washington Post.

http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2015-03-13/friday-news-roundup-domestic

They start discussing HRC and her ineffectual and inept handling of whole email debacle at 24:20 on the video.

What's a poor Hill Fan to do? Desperately shriek that Diane Rehm, the Washington Post, The Economist and Slate are all right wing sources?

It's an excellent discussion of all the ways HRC is in trouble with her blundering attempts to spin her self-regulated document dump, SIX YEARS AFTER THE FACT, as complying with the regulations in place while she was SOS - AND the fact that this matter will take months to get sorted. And that her paranoid insecurity is her own worst enemy and the reason she seems incapable of transparency.

Anyone else reminded of the attempted early spin on the Watergate breakin? Nothing here - just move along. But then along came Martha Mitchell. A grateful nation thanks you, Martha.

When the Watergate scandal broke, it was Martha Mitchell, wife of Attorney General, John Mitchell and who was often self-medicated with martinis, who started calling up reporters about her fears that Mitchell was being set up as a scapegoat. The Mitchells lived at the Watergate at that time. Among those reporters were Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. She didn’t know how much John was really involved.

When it became apparent to Nixon and Mitchell that she couldn’t be shut up, they had her kidnapped and medicated. She still managed to call a reporter in the middle of the night about the incident. Well, the rest as they say is history.

Is there anyone involved in Hillary's document dump who will step forward? What about senders or recipients of incendiary or politically sensitive emails to her personal account? Just because Hillary "disappeared" incriminating emails from her server in no way guarantees they won't be revealed by others. As many have speculated, the GOP will hold on to any they discover until the election campaign. Perhaps save them to spring on her in the midst of a nationally televised presidential debate. Now, more than ever, her candidacy would be a train wreck waiting to happen.

What will you be doing on 3/14/15 at 9:26:53?

If you’re a math enthusiast, maybe you’ll be celebrating the once-a-century day when the calendar and the clock align to represent the first 10 digits of pi (3.141592653).

As you remember from middle school geometry, pi is the ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter, and is always the same, no matter what circle you use to compute it. It is an irrational number that never repeats, with an infinite number of decimal places — though in 2013 a researcher took it to eight quadrillion places right of the decimal.

This year, the “Pi Day of the Century” will be marked in all kinds of creative ways. At the San Francisco Exploratorium, where the official celebration first began, you can participate in a pi procession and pizza pie dough tossing.

If you’re an applicant to the M.I.T. class of 2019, you’ll find out at exactly 9:26 whether or not you were admitted.

http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/03/12/throwback-thursday-the-pi-day-of-the-century/?_r=0
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 27 Next »