Hillary Clinton is Done: part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
wareyin said:
Yeah, those sneaky Aussies, Swedes, and ...Norwegies? Nords?
Always trying to buy US influence!
Click to expand...

Connect the dots, man.

Did our invasion plans for Scandinavia even come to a vote? Quashed it in the executive branch. Bought and paid for.

Wait'll her first sixty days in office when she introduces her plan to have "Strine" made the official language of the country.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Connect the dots, man.

Did our invasion plans for Scandinavia even come to a vote? Quashed it in the executive branch. Bought and paid for.

Wait'll her first sixty days in office when she introduces her plan to have "Strine" made the official language of the country.
Click to expand...

Strewth !
 
wareyin said:
Yeah, those sneaky Aussies, Swedes, and ...Norwegies? Nords?
Always trying to buy US influence!
Click to expand...

Foolmewunz said:
Connect the dots, man.

Did our invasion plans for Scandinavia even come to a vote? Quashed it in the executive branch. Bought and paid for.

Wait'll her first sixty days in office when she introduces her plan to have "Strine" made the official language of the country.
Click to expand...

Clever, but I guess we are ignoring the donations from say, Russian backers of Uranium One . . . But sure, let's smokescreen the whole thing. . .
 
xjx388 said:
Clever, but I guess we are ignoring the donations from say, Russian backers of Uranium One . . . But sure, let's smokescreen the whole thing. . .
Click to expand...
Meh, you still think that was a thing? That somehow Clinton, one of the nine members who could approve but could not stop that deal, was bought off?
 
Last edited:
Apparently my offer for more free money (for me) was not acceptable. No worries, we're now on page 79!

Is Hillary Clinton done?
 
wareyin said:
Meh, you still think that was a thing? That somehow Clinton, one of the nine members who could approve but could not stop that deal, was bought off?
Click to expand...

It was a thing, the NYT broke the story. I understand that it's hard to get Clinton supporters to accept that it was a thing.

There is no doubt here that the ones who stood to gain the most were big donors to her Foundation. She was an influential person on that committee. One interpretation of the outcome is that Clinton lobbied hard to get a deal closed that helped her friends despite the national security implications of giving Russia such control of our uranium. That interpretation is the reason why 1)Clinton had to make a deal with Obama to disclose all donors to the Foundation -which she failed to do and 2)People in high government positions should take pains to make sure such interpretations are not possible.
 
xjx388 said:
It was a thing, the NYT broke the story. I understand that it's hard to get Clinton supporters to accept that it was a thing.

There is no doubt here that the ones who stood to gain the most were big donors to her Foundation. She was an influential person on that committee. One interpretation of the outcome is that Clinton lobbied hard to get a deal closed that helped her friends despite the national security implications of giving Russia such control of our uranium. That interpretation is the reason why 1)Clinton had to make a deal with Obama to disclose all donors to the Foundation -which she failed to do and 2)People in high government positions should take pains to make sure such interpretations are not possible.
Click to expand...
That may be one interpretation, but it is certainly not the most reasonable or likely one.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/u...s-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html
Click to expand...

Much of the Clinton Cash book has been discredited.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2015/apr/26/fact-checking-april-26-shows-clinton-cash/

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/04/no-veto-power-for-clinton-on-uranium-deal/

Clinton's rebuttal, FWIW: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/the-briefing/fact-checking-clinton-cash/



From the NYT article:
In a statement, Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign, said no one “has ever produced a shred of evidence supporting the theory that Hillary Clinton ever took action as secretary of state to support the interests of donors to the Clinton Foundation.” He emphasized that multiple United States agencies, as well as the Canadian government, had signed off on the deal and that, in general, such matters were handled at a level below the secretary. “To suggest the State Department, under then-Secretary Clinton, exerted undue influence in the U.S. government’s review of the sale of Uranium One is utterly baseless,” he added.
Click to expand...

I think I'll wait for better evidence. No doubt Trump and others are working diligently to cough up some evidence.

No doubt there was some back-scratching going on. The question is, how much was business, and did any of it cross the line into political corruption?

Not saying it didn't happen. But I'm wondering given the Clintons are very savvy, if they stayed just within the lines or not.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
Much of the Clinton Cash book has been discredited.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2015/apr/26/fact-checking-april-26-shows-clinton-cash/

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/04/no-veto-power-for-clinton-on-uranium-deal/

Clinton's rebuttal, FWIW: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/the-briefing/fact-checking-clinton-cash/



From the NYT article:

I think I'll wait for better evidence. No doubt Trump and others are working diligently to cough up some evidence.
Click to expand...

Not quite the metaphor you're looking for.

No doubt there was some back-scratching going on. The question is, how much was business, and did any of it cross the line into political corruption?

Not saying it didn't happen. But I'm wondering given the Clintons are very savvy, if they stayed just within the lines or not.
Click to expand...

The Clintons are constantly crossing lines, erasing them, pissing on them, or, in Bill's case, even coming close to them (yuk yuk, yecch). They just leave it to their flacks to pull them back, clean up the lines, and claim the Clintons turned in early after a friendly game of scrabble.
 
sunmaster14 said:
Not quite the metaphor you're looking for.



The Clintons are constantly crossing lines, erasing them, pissing on them, or, in Bill's case, even coming close to them (yuk yuk, yecch). They just leave it to their flacks to pull them back, clean up the lines, and claim the Clintons turned in early after a friendly game of scrabble.
Click to expand...

Who is that candidate you are supporting, again?
 
sunmaster14 said:
Not quite the metaphor you're looking for.



The Clintons are constantly crossing lines, erasing them, pissing on them, or, in Bill's case, even coming close to them (yuk yuk, yecch). They just leave it to their flacks to pull them back, clean up the lines, and claim the Clintons turned in early after a friendly game of scrabble.
Click to expand...
I think i've been through about as many presidential administrations as you. I can say Bill Clinton was no worse offender in things like that then the others. The "crimes"* may not all line up neatly, but no president has been clean.

But then again, I'm able to look at the facts and evidence without political blinders.

*I'll pass your "yuk yuk" comment along to my grandson, as he's most able to relate to that level of "humor".
 
Last edited:
sunmaster14 said:
Not quite the metaphor you're looking for.



The Clintons are constantly crossing lines, erasing them, pissing on them, or, in Bill's case, even coming close to them (yuk yuk, yecch). They just leave it to their flacks to pull them back, clean up the lines, and claim the Clintons turned in early after a friendly game of scrabble.
Click to expand...
While the former President you no doubt voted for and still say, against all reason, was a good President, lied us into an extremely counterproductive war that got thousands of Americans killed and is literally a war criminal.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom