Reply to this is the only place to admit it

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "this is the only place to admit it"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If you care about our economy and jobs, HRC isn't the President for you.  Hillary supports TPP just like her husband did NAFTA and it killed the manufacturing sector.  She said she'd destroy coal, tried to back-pedal but those folks remember.  She's about as trustworthy as money lender from the mob.

Trump isn't my ideal candidate, but I believe he would fill positions with good people, actually try to fix this a like the VA (which is important to me) and won't use his position to get money for his friends and himself like Clinton did.

I honestly hope the people who hacked her systems release more info in her, so we get to see the "real" Hillary.  And, I don't believe it was the Russians.  Any good hacker won't leave their mark and the FBI still hasn't released their findings on who they believe it is.  [/quote]

Remember that while Bill doesn't draw a salary from their foundation, he does indeed make speeches about the foundation which is is income.

So the foundation made money twice - through donations and through speeches.

[quote]How serious is it? If the Clinton Foundation’s strength is President Clinton’s endless intellectual omnivorousness, its weakness is the distractibility and lack of interest in detail that sometimes come with it. On a philanthropic level, the foundation gets decent ratings from outside review groups, though critics charge that it’s too diffuse to do much good, that the money has not always achieved what it was intended to, and that in some cases the money doesn’t seem to have achieved its intended purpose. The foundation made errors in its tax returns it has to correct. Overall, however, the essential questions about the Clinton Foundation come down to two, related issues. The first is the seemingly unavoidable conflicts of interest: How did the Clintons’ charitable work intersect with their for-profit speeches? How did their speeches intersect with Hillary Clinton’s work at the State Department? Were there quid-pro-quos involving U.S. policy? Did the foundation steer money improperly to for-profit companies owned by friends? The second, connected question is about disclosure. When Clinton became secretary, she agreed that the foundation would make certain disclosures, which it’s now clear it didn’t always do. And the looming questions about Clinton’s State Department emails make it harder to answer those questions.[/quote]
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/tracking-the-clinton-controversies-from-whitewater-to-benghazi/396182/[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics