HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » HuffPost: Clinton Foundat...

Tue May 26, 2015, 12:43 PM

 

HuffPost: Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department

HuffPost link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/clinton-foundation-donors_0_n_7441486.html

David J. Sirota is an American political commentator and radio host based in Denver. He is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist, Democratic political spokesperson, and blogger.

Full story is from International Business Times:

Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department

By David Sirota @davidsirota d.sirota@ibtimes.com, Andrew Perez @AndrewPerezDC andrew.perez@ibtimes.com on May 26 2015 8:44 AM EDT


Under Hillary Clinton, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments had given millions to the Clinton Foundation. Yana Paskova/Getty Images

Even by the standards of arms deals between the United States and Saudi Arabia, this one was enormous. A consortium of American defense contractors led by Boeing would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to the United States' oil-rich ally in the Middle East.

Israeli officials were agitated, reportedly complaining to the Obama administration that this substantial enhancement to Saudi air power risked disrupting the region's fragile balance of power. The deal appeared to collide with the State Department’s documented concerns about the repressive policies of the Saudi royal family.

But now, in late 2011, Hillary Clinton’s State Department was formally clearing the sale, asserting that it was in the national interest. At a press conference in Washington to announce the department’s approval, an assistant secretary of state, Andrew Shapiro, declared that the deal had been “a top priority” for Clinton personally. Shapiro, a longtime aide to Clinton since her Senate days, added that the “U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army have excellent relationships in Saudi Arabia.”

These were not the only relationships bridging leaders of the two nations. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contributed at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, the philanthropic enterprise she has overseen with her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Just two months before the deal was finalized, Boeing -- the defense contractor that manufactures one of the fighter jets the Saudis were especially keen to acquire, the F-15 -- contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to a company press release.

http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187


David J. Sirota is an American political commentator and radio host based in Denver. He is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist, Democratic political spokesperson, and blogger.

85 replies, 8023 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 85 replies Author Time Post
Reply HuffPost: Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department (Original post)
NYC_SKP May 2015 OP
Tierra_y_Libertad May 2015 #1
1000words May 2015 #2
KoKo May 2015 #81
geek tragedy May 2015 #3
B2G May 2015 #4
geek tragedy May 2015 #5
NYC_SKP May 2015 #7
geek tragedy May 2015 #8
NYC_SKP May 2015 #9
geek tragedy May 2015 #11
zeemike May 2015 #41
bvar22 May 2015 #60
NYC_SKP May 2015 #63
razorman May 2015 #76
Marr May 2015 #82
tridim May 2015 #6
rhett o rick May 2015 #24
nashville_brook May 2015 #29
bvar22 May 2015 #61
Doctor_J May 2015 #10
BrotherIvan May 2015 #12
NYC_SKP May 2015 #13
Doctor_J May 2015 #14
BrotherIvan May 2015 #16
KoKo May 2015 #83
BrotherIvan May 2015 #84
Robbins May 2015 #28
AtomicKitten May 2015 #70
bvar22 May 2015 #77
AtomicKitten May 2015 #78
hifiguy May 2015 #33
BrotherIvan May 2015 #37
hifiguy May 2015 #47
BrotherIvan May 2015 #50
Orsino May 2015 #15
Divernan May 2015 #17
NYC_SKP May 2015 #21
Fred Sanders May 2015 #36
BrotherIvan May 2015 #38
Fred Sanders May 2015 #40
BrotherIvan May 2015 #43
Fred Sanders May 2015 #44
BrotherIvan May 2015 #49
workinclasszero May 2015 #64
Fumesucker May 2015 #45
zeemike May 2015 #46
Fred Sanders May 2015 #51
zeemike May 2015 #54
Fred Sanders May 2015 #57
zeemike May 2015 #58
Fred Sanders May 2015 #59
zeemike May 2015 #62
dsc May 2015 #74
bvar22 May 2015 #73
Fred Sanders May 2015 #75
AtomicKitten May 2015 #18
nadinbrzezinski May 2015 #19
NYC_SKP May 2015 #23
nadinbrzezinski May 2015 #25
KoKo May 2015 #65
Divernan May 2015 #26
ChisolmTrailDem May 2015 #20
DesMoinesDem May 2015 #22
Robbins May 2015 #27
hifiguy May 2015 #48
johnnyreb May 2015 #30
NYC Liberal May 2015 #31
NYC_SKP May 2015 #35
Fred Sanders May 2015 #52
NYC Liberal May 2015 #53
KoKo May 2015 #67
upaloopa May 2015 #79
NYC_SKP May 2015 #80
upaloopa May 2015 #85
azureblue May 2015 #32
LittleBlue May 2015 #34
MaggieD May 2015 #39
NYC_SKP May 2015 #55
MaggieD May 2015 #56
polly7 May 2015 #66
KoKo May 2015 #68
L0oniX May 2015 #72
DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #42
antigop May 2015 #69
L0oniX May 2015 #71

Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 12:45 PM

1. "....asserting that it was in the national interest."

 

Uh-huh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)


Response to 1000words (Reply #2)

Wed May 27, 2015, 06:51 PM

81. All one needs to know about Hillary as SOS...is this:

Published on Oct 20, 2011

Speaking between network interviews, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton jokes with reporter on early, unconfirmed reports that deposed Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi had been killed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 12:47 PM

3. So, the argument by inference is that Clinton isn't influenced by pro-Israel donors and lobbyists.

 

Good to know.

Israeli officials were agitated, reportedly complaining to the Obama administration that this substantial enhancement to Saudi air power risked disrupting the region's fragile balance of power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #3)

Tue May 26, 2015, 12:49 PM

4. Yeah, she's in the Saudi's corner.

 

Stellar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B2G (Reply #4)

Tue May 26, 2015, 12:49 PM

5. Do you think President Obama was not consulted on this decision?

 

Most people would find it laughable that Clinton doesn't get a shit ton of money from pro-Israel donors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #3)

Tue May 26, 2015, 12:51 PM

7. Reagan sold weapons to both sides during Iran-Iraq war.

 

Remembering the Dead: Reagan Armed Iraq and Iran in 1980s War That Killed Over 1 Million

We look at the policies of the Reagan administration in the Middle East, specifically during the Iran-Iraq war, one of the bloodiest conflicts in modern times in which more than a million people were killed. Chemical weapons were used and two of the most ancient societies on earth were devastated. We speak with Iranian human rights lawyer and 2003 Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi and journalist Alan Friedman about how the Reagan administration armed Iran and normalized relations with Iraq, selling weapons to both sides of the conflict.

http://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/9/remembering_the_dead_reagan_armed_iraq

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #7)

Tue May 26, 2015, 12:54 PM

8. Do you think that President Obama was left in the dark about this decision?

 

Also, does this indicate to you that we have no need to worry about Clinton being unduly influenced by the likes of Haim Saban?

Maybe this decision just reflected the foreign policy priorities of the administration?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #8)

Tue May 26, 2015, 12:58 PM

9. Clinton Foundation reported that it "violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration"

 

That is by their own admission.

Now, I'm not saying that Obama did or did not approve or direct Clinton in this matter.

It may well have reflected on Obama's policies, I don't at this point care, I'm consumed by the decisions we all have to make about the primary and following general election.

If we select Hillary as our nominee, we will lose the general and if we win, then we are fucked.

We need to do better and we need to start soon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #9)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:03 PM

11. Just so I can get this straight,

 

if Clinton has Choice A or Choice B to make,

and

Choice A will piss of Donor Group Y but please Donor Group Z
Choice B will piss off Donor Group Z but please Donor Group Y

seems that there's not any story there. Certainly not the quid pro quo insinuated in the story.

The Saudi's contribution to the Clinton foundation is piddling compared to the donations she's gotten from Team Israel.

Haim Saban alone contributed $25 Million to the Clinton Foundation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #11)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:53 PM

41. There is never any quid pro quo when our side does it.

But never the less it is play to play even if it is never spoken.
Foundations are set up for that reason...to shelter the money. That is how the elite play the game.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #7)

Tue May 26, 2015, 05:13 PM

60. Comparing Hillary to Regan?

You might be on to something,
but it will just get Hillary more Republican Warmonger votes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #60)

Tue May 26, 2015, 05:44 PM

63. No, Reagan did it for ideological reasons, not to raise funds for himself, his family, or foundation

 

Two different situations.

I don't know of another Secretary of State who stood go gain personally, or on behalf of any foundation, for and of the decisions they made while serving.

"Serving", that's a hoot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #60)

Wed May 27, 2015, 03:56 PM

76. I doubt that this will get her more 'R' votes. They hate her too much.

I am more concerned that her share of progressive votes will not diminish, even if this all proves to be true. To me, that would simply be showing an attitude of "To hell with principles. Winning is everything." The accusations have to be proven first, though. Let's wait and see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #3)

Wed May 27, 2015, 06:57 PM

82. I doubt you'd be so anxious to make logic pretzels if this were a Republican.

 

C'mon-- this doesn't look good at all. Even if there's nothing actually to it and it's only an appearance of impropriety, it speaks to a certain tone deafness to potential political scandal.

But I'd say there's a hell of a lot to it, no matter how you slice it. I mean, this sums up our MIC problem perfectly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 12:50 PM

6. I feel like

ing

Everything about her is negative. We must do better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tridim (Reply #6)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:54 PM

24. I agree and we can do better with Sen Sanders. No quid pro quo to worry about. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tridim (Reply #6)

Tue May 26, 2015, 02:19 PM

29. i just don't want to have that queasy feeling in 2016.

let's get this over with now and find the candidate who can win. not the candidate who's going to bring the whole party down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tridim (Reply #6)

Tue May 26, 2015, 05:15 PM

61. What if it is the truth.

Does the Truth make you puke?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:00 PM

10. it was Obama's state department!!!!1!111!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:03 PM

12. If this turns out to be even remotely true then the Republicans have their attack ads

With all these questions, this makes her extremely vulnerable in the general. I'm shocked at what he is asserting. Even if it is not true, it looks very, very bad.

Under Clinton's leadership, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments have given money to the Clinton Foundation, according to an IBTimes analysis of State Department and foundation data. That figure -- derived from the three full fiscal years of Clinton’s term as Secretary of State (from October 2010 to September 2012) -- represented nearly double the value of American arms sales made to the those countries and approved by the State Department during the same period of President George W. Bush’s second term.

The Clinton-led State Department also authorized $151 billion of separate Pentagon-brokered deals for 16 of the countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation, resulting in a 143 percent increase in completed sales to those nations over the same time frame during the Bush administration. These extra sales were part of a broad increase in American military exports that accompanied Obama’s arrival in the White House.

American defense contractors also donated to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state and in some cases made personal payments to Bill Clinton for speaking engagements. Such firms and their subsidiaries were listed as contractors in $163 billion worth of Pentagon-negotiated deals that were authorized by the Clinton State Department between 2009 and 2012.


Hillary Clinton’s willingness to allow those with business before the State Department to finance her foundation heightens concerns about how she would manage such relationships as president, said Lawrence Lessig, the director of Harvard University’s Safra Center for Ethics. These continuing revelations raise a fundamental question of judgment,” Lessig told IBTimes. “Can it really be that the Clintons didn't recognize the questions these transactions would raise? And if they did, what does that say about their sense of the appropriate relationship between private gain and public good?”

National security experts assert that the overlap between the list of Clinton Foundation donors and those with business before the the State Department presents a troubling conflict of interest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BrotherIvan (Reply #12)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:05 PM

13. Yup, it will be nonstop drama, this is why we need to bail NOW. OBTW, Bernie launches today.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BrotherIvan (Reply #12)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:09 PM

14. it's beginning to look like the president's in on some nefarious shit as well

 

Arrgh. So discouraging. I suppose if he wasn't corruptible he would have never been elected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #14)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:41 PM

16. This Clinton Foundation stuff has come out incredibly early

I wonder what they are saving. This is a story that won't go away no matter how many times we are told it is verboten to even mention it. It's a ticking time bomb.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clintons-raised-nearly-2-billion-for-foundation-since-2001/2015/02/18/b8425d88-a7cd-11e4-a7c2-03d37af98440_story.html

The financial success of the foundation, which funds charitable work around the world, underscores the highly unusual nature of another Clinton candidacy. The organization has given contributors entree, outside the traditional political arena, to a possible president. Foreign donors and countries that are likely to have interests before a potential Clinton administration — and yet are ineligible to give to U.S. political campaigns — have affirmed their support for the family’s work through the charitable giving.

The Post review of foundation data, updated this month on the group’s Web site to reflect giving through 2014, found substantial overlap between the Clinton political machinery and the foundation.

Nearly half of the major donors who are backing Ready for Hillary, a group promoting her 2016 presidential bid, as well as nearly half of the bundlers from her 2008 campaign, have given at least $10,000 to the foundation, either on their own or through foundations or companies they run.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BrotherIvan (Reply #16)

Wed May 27, 2015, 07:39 PM

83. Political Tactic? Get the "Dirt Out There Early" and it will DIE before Election Time?

Last edited Wed May 27, 2015, 08:15 PM - Edit history (1)

That seems to be the Strategy from the CORPORATE DONOR FUNDS funding the Campaign Managers of both Hillary and the Repub's "Clown Car."

The Clintons and Bushies can use their vast International & Local Corporate Access to suck the GAZILLIONS of DOLLARS Available from BOTH "Nefarious & Legitimate" sources on their way to the White House. "CITIZENS UNITED" RULES!

WILL IT WORK THIS TIME.... That's the Question....???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #83)

Wed May 27, 2015, 07:41 PM

84. Perhaps, I am a little sceptical

Unless they're saving the real stuff for later or they think they can't beat her but can beat the socialist. We'll see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #14)

Tue May 26, 2015, 02:09 PM

28. Obama

he's a corporate dem.he has sold us out already on

Geting out of iraq
expanding NSA programs
social justice by saying nothing as young black men are killed
TPP

I can see this as one who supported obama over hillary and who supported him in 2008 and 2012 general elections.

Hillary couldn't do this if true for clinton foundation donors without his approval.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robbins (Reply #28)

Tue May 26, 2015, 07:53 PM

70. She could (and did) by not abiding by the disclosure agreement she had with the White House.

 

Hillary couldn't do this if true for clinton foundation donors without his approval.



State Department will not review Clinton ethics pledge breaches

Source: Reuters
link: http://news.yahoo.com/state-dept-not-review-clinton-ethics-pledge-breaches-204846487.html

(Reuters) - The U.S. State Department will not review the breaches of the 2008 ethics agreement Hillary Clinton signed in order to become secretary of state after her family's charities admitted in March that they had not complied, a spokesman said on Thursday.

Clinton, now the Democratic front-runner in the 2016 presidential election, had promised the federal government that the Clinton Foundation and its associated charities would name all donors annually while she was the nation's top diplomat.

She also promised that the charities would let the State Department's ethics office review beforehand any proposed new foreign governments donations.

In March, the charities confirmed to Reuters for the first time that they had not complied with those pledges for most of Clinton's four years at the State Department.

The State Department "regrets" that it did not get to review the new foreign government funding, but does not plan to look into the matter further, spokesman Jeff Rathke said on Thursday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #70)

Wed May 27, 2015, 04:22 PM

77. Oh Boy.

"The State Department "regrets" that it did not get to review the new foreign government funding, but does not plan to look into the matter further, spokesman Jeff Rathke said on Thursday."

Two Americas.
I'm not in Hillary's America where the "State Department "regrets" that it did not get to review..
I'm in the other America where they take my property and throw my ass in jail for a lot less.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #77)

Wed May 27, 2015, 04:37 PM

78. but they're sorry

 

Really really sorry. And regretful. Plus they're sorry. Mostly regretful. And sorry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BrotherIvan (Reply #12)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:39 PM

33. Oy.

 

Double-plus ungood.

The Clintons have an army of skeletons in their closet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #33)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:48 PM

37. I find it incredibly sad

These are two smart, motivated people who could have done massive amounts of good for this country and the world. President Carter chose the path that did not lead to personal riches and look at what he has done. I'm sad to see this happen to the Clinton legacy, but the choice was their own. The idea that they were naive of any of this, or even that she was duped by Bush into voting for the Iraq War, when they are this connected and powerful produces a look on my face of such puzzlement and incredulity I fear if I look in the mirror I might turn to stone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BrotherIvan (Reply #37)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:05 PM

47. When you sell out that completely

 

you have to expect to be called on it. Were she not running for president few would care, but the arrogance of doing all this double-dealing and self-dealing and pretending it's irrelevant when you are seeking the presidency is just pathetic. This is almost at a Bush-like level of arrogance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #47)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:12 PM

50. Yes, it is

and for her supporters to demand that people unsee everything is a bridge too far.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:19 PM

15. This is Amurika. EVERYONE gets weapons deals, whether they want them or not. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:44 PM

17. $1/4 mil.here; $5 mil. there - my god how the blood money rolls in!

Defense Contractors Donated To The Clinton Foundation
The Clinton Foundation accepted donations from six companies benefiting from U.S. State Department arms export approvals.
Defense Contractor/Donation Min. ($)

Boeing 5,000,000
General Electric 1,000,000
Goldman Sachs
(Hawker Beechcraft) 500,000
Honeywell 50,000
Lockheed Martin 250,000
United Technologies 50,000

In April 2011, Goldman Sachs paid Bill Clinton $200,000 to speak to “approximately 250 high level clients and investors” in New York, according to State Department records obtained by Judicial Watch. Two months later, the State Department approved a $675 million foreign military sale involving Hawker Beechcraft -- a company that was then part-owned by Goldman Sachs. As part of the deal, Hawker Beechcraft would provide support to the government of Iraq to maintain a fleet of aircraft used for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions. Goldman Sachs has also contributed at least $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to donation records.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/clinton-foundation-donors_0_n_7441486.html

Clinton Foundation Donors Get Big Weapons Deals

17 out of 20 countries that have donated to the Clinton Foundation saw increases in arms exports authorized by Hillary Clinton's State Department.
Country Donation/Min.- ($)FY06-08/ ($)FY10-12 ($) / Difference (%)
Algeria250,000 /$649,943,709 /$2,431,535,005 /+274
Australia 10 mil. /$8,030,754,085 /$23,953,849,391 /+198
Bahrain50,000 /$219,718,802 /$ 630,586,020 /+187
Brunei1/4 mil. /$101,239,902 /$19,256,846 / -81
Canada 1/4 mil. 20,975,621,915 24,844,128,294 /+18
Germany 100,000 9,147,637,319 9,839,619,231 /+8
Ireland 5 mil 144,929,678 107,064,341 /-26
Italy 100,000 6,195,891,571 12,274,692,168 /+98
Jamaica 50,000 18,572,209 11,360,582 /-39
Kuwait 5 mil. /$1,895,298,212 /$2,109,893,611 /+11
Morocco2 mil /$250,045,824 /$253,096,156 /+ 1
Netherlands 5 mil - 3,069,131,994 - 4,655,490,802 /+ 52
Norway 10 mil. - 2,718,237,833- 3,351,140,380 /+ 23
Oman 1 mil. - 170,597,237 /$547,003,781 /+221
Qatar 1 mil. /$271,325,915 /$4,291,824,236 /+1,482
SaudiArabia10mil /$4,105,561,815 /$8,094,719,012 /+97
Taiwan 500,000 /$2,612,251,394 /$3,811,233,565 /+46
Thailand 250,000 /$656,266,680 /$1,113,283,489 /+70
UAE 1 mil /$2,261,801,903 /$24,998,754,760 /+1,005
UK 1mil /$26,225,307,395 /$38,015,933,065 /+45

Source: U.S. State Department and Clinton Foundation donor data
http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Reply #17)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:50 PM

21. You have to admit, it's a brilliant way to "manage" money and influence.

 

It will be the Clinton Legacy, no prison time will be served, however.

Tomorrow or so you should make an OP out of that data:

Source: U.S. State Department and Clinton Foundation donor data
http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Reply #17)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:47 PM

36. Yep. If this is considered corruption then all American politicians are beyond corrupt....more nothing.

Why folks supporting Sanders feel this addictive need to bash Clinton to support their own choice speaks volumes about their own decision making process.

The armed camp mentality is just sad.

"Clinton Attacks Sanders"......NEVER. No need, the debate for Clinton is on the issues of today, not the
fishing expeditions from yesterday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #36)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:49 PM

38. Non sequitor

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BrotherIvan (Reply #38)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:52 PM

40. Non-scandal. Again. How many now, I lost count. Republicans must be loving the divide, the conquer part comes later.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #40)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:58 PM

43. Acting like it's not happening doesn't accomplish much of anything

This IS an issue that Repulicans can attack her with. She and the foundation should have been squeaky clean if she wanted to run again. This is an unforced error of epic proportions and makes her easy to beat in the general. That's straight logic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BrotherIvan (Reply #43)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:03 PM

44. You could have posted word for word the same thing for each of the last 12 weeks of assorted "scandals".... and it would be as

irrelevant.

How many scandals has it been now...should we make a list....and like dust in the wind were they all gone.

Support Sanders, fine, attack Clinton because folks think it helps...it does not. As Sanders said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #44)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:11 PM

49. I am not attacking Clinton as a person

I am saying with all these controversies right out of the gate of her campaign she is an extremely weak candidate. There is a difference, though you may refuse to see it. She is a politician asking people to vote for her. That means she is opening herself to lots of public scrutiny as it should be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #40)

Tue May 26, 2015, 05:57 PM

64. Just another Bernie-ite doing the devils(republicans)work

Apparently Bernie's vision for America is to trash, smear and condemn with innuendo, because there are no illegalities, Hillary and, what the hell President Obama and any other democrat that doesn't worship at his fantasy socialist altar.

And here I though Bernie was above all that. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #36)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:03 PM

45. This type of thing is the *reason* people support Sanders over Clinton in the first place

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #36)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:05 PM

46. you mean Sanders has a foundation too?

And the foreign governments contribute to it?
Link please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zeemike (Reply #46)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:13 PM

51. Sanders may want to set one up, many poor folks around the world have been helped by Clinton

Foundation Charity.

A foreign government gave to a recognized, admired and established charity not from their own country.....what an outrage! What a scandal! Burn the witch!

Folks are so silly sometimes, aren't they?

Quid pro quo. Where is it? No evidence required, the media accepts speculation as news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #51)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:30 PM

54. And many rich people are made richer too.

Who runs these foundations and what are they paid?...do they do it for nothing out of charity?
And who gets contracts for the Programs?
I am a skeptic for sure, because I don't believe...and cynical too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zeemike (Reply #54)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:33 PM

57. The Clinton Foundation has a website to answer every one of your queries.

https://www.clintonfoundation.org

Creating Partnerships of Purpose
We convene businesses, governments, NGOs, and individuals to improve global health and wellness, increase opportunity for women and girls, reduce childhood obesity, create economic opportunity and growth, and help communities address the effects of climate change.

Learn more and take action with us today.

- See more at: https://www.clintonfoundation.org/#sthash.g1S2OZUX.dpuf

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #57)

Tue May 26, 2015, 05:00 PM

58. I know they do and I know what they say.

But it is like going to a Monsanto web site and expecting to lear what they do...you know it is going to say it is all good...Or Exxon to hear how they are protecting the environment.
The devil is in the details.

How much do they pay their BODs...and when they create a program to help the poor who actually gets what?

http://www.wsj.com/articles/mary-anastasia-ogrady-the-clinton-foundation-and-haiti-contracts-1425855083

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2013/07/clintons-pushed-most-wasteful-of-u-s-funded-haiti-projects/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zeemike (Reply #58)

Tue May 26, 2015, 05:03 PM

59. RW sites. Judicial Watch is pure Fox-like propaganda. Perhaps you have credible sources?

Did you not know that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #59)

Tue May 26, 2015, 05:17 PM

62. And so it WSJ I supose.

But are the facts correct or not?
But pardon me I don't have your list of approved news sources...just Google.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zeemike (Reply #62)

Wed May 27, 2015, 02:25 PM

74. the wsj is a murdock owned paper

so yeah, it is pretty frickin right wing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #51)

Wed May 27, 2015, 02:16 PM

73. Did you miss the part about Arm Sales to countries that donated?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #73)

Wed May 27, 2015, 03:30 PM

75. No. I read that part just after the speculation with no evidence began. Got evidence?

Bengazhi is for Republicans, everything else looks like it is for Democrats to attack Clinton with.

The more the faulty and impotent attacks, the more the stature of Clinton grows, so please proceed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:45 PM

18. Chapter 3: "The Audacity of Something for Something." Continuing saga Hillary & Bill Clinton Show.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:46 PM

19. To be fair I found plenty of these transfers in the release

 

going back to the Reagan WH... this is just continuity in policy. I do not know what scares me more, the alleged quid pro quo, or the autopilot nature of these transfers?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #19)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:54 PM

23. The difference in this case is the way that suddenly speaking fees were being paid to both Clintons,

 

And additional funds flowed into their family foundation.

Nothing like this happened during Reagan, or Bush, or any other administrations which were selling to both sides in a conflict.

That practice goes back for generations.

The personal gain from it, measured in tens of millions of dollars, is new to this administration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #23)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:57 PM

25. I understand what Sirota is alleging

 

and if true, it is quid pro quo

But I do not know what is more scary, autopilot or quid pro quo

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #25)

Tue May 26, 2015, 07:18 PM

65. ...! "AutoPilot or Quid Pro Quo." And those are questions that need to be asked & answered..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #23)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:57 PM

26. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:50 PM

20. Aiding and abetting and in cahoots with the perpetrators/financiers of 9/11 with 3000 dead

 

from the Twin Towers and millions more killed or maimed in the resulting bush contrived conflagration, for which she voted.

YEA! That's our Democratic candidate!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 01:51 PM

22. "Boeing contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation."

 

No surprise that Hillary is a supporter of corporate welfare through the ExIm Bank.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 02:03 PM

27. I tell You

I have the wonder on the smarts of clintons.Are they so stupid as not to prepare for her run.

What liberals will say are mild compared to what GOP will say with help from MSM.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robbins (Reply #27)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:07 PM

48. Greed can overwhelm even smart people.

 

In fact it does all the time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:05 PM

30. More reason to keep the 28 Pages issue up-front.

The good Senator Bob Graham (retired) has been sticking his neck way over the line to tell us:

"While the 28 pages are maybe the most important and the most prominent, they are by no means the only example of where information that is important to understanding the full extent of 9/11 have also been withheld from the American people.

This is not a narrow issue of withholding information at one place, in one time. This is a pervasive pattern of covering up the role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11, by all of the agencies of the federal government which have access to information that might illuminate Saudi Arabia’s role in 9/11."

http://28pages.org/2015/01/11/must-read-quotes-from-last-weeks-28-pages-press-conference/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:33 PM

31. The U.S. has sold weapons to countries forever.

But now because a Clinton is involved, it's suddenly outrageous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #31)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:45 PM

35. Name another US Secretary of State who has personally profited from the work they did in office.

 

I'll be right here.

Your candidate is the only one living.

And, she her candidacy is, therefore, dead on arrival.

Come over to the light.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #35)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:16 PM

52. White hat/black hat. Red camp, blue camp. Pick a camp and a hat, fling some crap? No thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #35)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:21 PM

53. We were dealing with these countries long before Clinton was SoS.

Clinton's candidacy is DoA? Sorry, no. She is one of the most popular leaders in the country and is overwhelmingly supported by Democrats -- and the liberal base of the party is her strongest base of support.

It's Sanders who is "dead on arrival" -- because barely anyone outside of DU and likeminded blogs wants him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #53)

Tue May 26, 2015, 07:21 PM

67. Are you in favor of "Forever War and Interventions" we Pay for with our Tax Dollars?

The "Endless Wars" draining our Domestic Resources causing Income Inequality along with Wall Street Banker Theives/Criminals and the rest of the MIC that Profits off of ENDLESS WARS & ENGAGEMENTS?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #35)

Wed May 27, 2015, 05:47 PM

79. Just curious what do you gain by bashing Hillary?

I don't think you are afraid she will be elected Predident.
You work at it as if you are a repub fighting her. Not saying you are a repub just that your non stop bashing her has another motive. I have a good guess and since you banned me I think you know what it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #79)

Wed May 27, 2015, 06:44 PM

80. $110/hour plus expenses.

 

If we get a good candidate out of this, I figure the payback for me will come out to something in that neighborhood for every hour I spend pointing out her flaws.

Having Obama win and benefiting from his insurance reform saved me over a million dollars in head surgeries last year and this spring, all at Stanford.

Getting a real progressive pays well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #80)

Wed May 27, 2015, 07:57 PM

85. But you are wrong about Hillary.

bashing her is not going to get Bernie or someone else elected.
It is ok if you state actual negative thigs that would harm us if she were elected but bashing for bashing sake is not productive

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:39 PM

32. another fake drama

based upon huge leaps of logic and assumptions not proven. I read it- there is no direct connection between one and the other - no cause and effect, and there is certainly not a shred of evidence, other than innuendo, that Ms. Clinton had anything to do with this. The truth of this is this: all this does is prove how stupid and desperate people are to find anything to smear Ms. Clinton with. Pathetic. Just pathetic.

Those assholes can't talk about the issues and qualifications -all they want is drama and smears and character assassinations. How much did America Rising pay this guy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:42 PM

34. She has a scary amount of baggage. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:52 PM

39. Already debunked to death in this thread....

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #39)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:32 PM

55. $130 million in speaking fees were debunked, I must have missed that.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #55)

Tue May 26, 2015, 04:32 PM

56. Read your own subject header

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #39)

Tue May 26, 2015, 07:20 PM

66. She got close to 20 million speaking in four cities up here ........ how could that figure not be

realistic?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #66)

Tue May 26, 2015, 07:22 PM

68. ...1

They Profit, Wall Street Profits, MIC Profits and all is GOOD to THEM!

What about the REST OF US?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MaggieD (Reply #39)

Tue May 26, 2015, 07:58 PM

72. Thanks for the link ...I forgot to K & R that one.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 03:55 PM

42. Another day, another attack, just another brick in the wall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 07:52 PM

69. For Hillary Clinton and Boeing, a beneficial relationship

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/for-hillary-clinton-and-boeing-a-beneficial-relationship/2014/04/13/21fe84ec-bc09-11e3-96ae-f2c36d2b1245_story.html

On a trip to Moscow early in her tenure as secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton played the role of international saleswoman, pressing Russian government officials to sign a multibillion-dollar deal to buy dozens of aircraft from Boeing.

A month later, Clinton was in China, where she jubilantly announced that the aerospace giant would be writing a generous check to help resuscitate floundering U.S. efforts to host a pavilion at the upcoming World’s Fair.

Boeing, she said, “has just agreed to double its contribution to $2 million.”

Clinton did not point out that, to secure the donation, the State Department had set aside ethics guidelines that first prohibited solicitations of Boeing and then later permitted only a $1 million gift from the company. Boeing had been included on a list of firms to be avoided because of its frequent reliance on the government for help negotiating overseas business and concern that a donation could be seen as an attempt to curry favor with U.S. officials.

The November 2009 episode was an indicator of a mutually beneficial relationship between one of the world’s major corporations and a potential future president. Clinton functioned as a powerful ally for Boeing’s business interests at home and abroad, while Boeing has invested resources in causes beneficial to Clinton’s public and political image.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Original post)

Tue May 26, 2015, 07:57 PM

71. Got attacked for this earlier today because of the info source. Glad to see Huffy go with this story

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread