Bill Clinton made $75 million from speeches

BeAChooser said:
Very few are aware of the facts surrounding Bill Clinton. They know next to nothing (and in many cases nothing) about Travelgate, CampaignFinancegate, Chinagate, Filegate, Emailgate, Rapegate, Pardongate, Monicagate, Fostergate, Browngate, etc. etc. etc. If they did, they might agree with me. Then they would know about evidence suggesting perjury, obstruction of justice, blackmail, intimidation of witnesses, evidence tampering, witness tampering, bribery, sexual harassment, sexual assault, rape, illegal campaign funding, abuse of the IRS, abuse of the military, abuse of the FBI, abuse of the DOJ, violation of drug laws, treason, national security violations, and even involvement in a murder or two (or at least their coverup). Certainly the democrat who wrote the articles of impeachment against Nixon agrees with me. Certainly the democrat who worked for the House Managers as the chief Clinton impeachment prosecutor agrees with me.

Like I said, the fact that people shell out a lot money to hear such a man speak, and then idolize him, says a lot about those people. Perhaps, if nothing else, that they are totally ignorant of the facts. :D



What I think about the Foster case you'll find here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=140659&page=4 , starting at post #132. Now if you want to debate me on that thread regarding the facts in that case, I'm more than ready. :D



So was Hitler, I hear tell. ;)
Click to expand...

So does anyone else loathe the use of -gate as a suffix to denote anything that has a hint of political scandal?
 
Wow! All those accusations Bill Clinton must be the Prof. Moriarty of modern American Politics. To be guilty of all those "gates" he would have to be involved in evil 24/7.

BaC - Is there a scandal since he left public office? Did he suddenly resign his evil ways for the humble life of a speaker? Also what is wrong with someone receiving fair market value for their services?

A little research reveals what an evil bastard he really is!

Bill Clinton has supported the following charities:

46664
Aid Still Required
ALAS
American Foundation for AIDS Research
American India Foundation
Artists for Peace and Justice
Bottletop
Bush Clinton Coastal Recovery Fund
CAMFED
CHOC
Chris Tucker Foundation
Clinton Bush Haiti Fund
Clinton Foundation
Clinton Global Initiative
Cotlands
FC Harlem
Food Bank For New York City
Global Fund
Heifer International
HELP USA
Ithemba Trust
Jewish National Fund
J/P Haitian Relief Organization
K.I.D.S.
Kiva
Make-A-Wish Foundation
MASSIVEGOOD
MusiCares
Music Rising
Reach For A Dream Foundation
Red Cross
ROTA
Rush Philanthropic Arts Foundation
Save the Children
STILLERSTRONG
St. Mary's Hospital
The Lunchbox Fund
TJ Martell Foundation
US Doctors for Africa
Walter Sisulu Paediatric Cardiac Centre for Africa
Yum-o!
Click to expand...

Of course not listed there is SPECTRE

ETA::D
 
Crossbow said:
He has given most of it away
Click to expand...

LOL!

Here's a news item that makes me skeptical about that ...

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...lnk&gl=us&client=safari&source=www.google.com

APRIL 8, 2008

When London socialite Renu Mehta sought to urge Britain’s super-rich into giving more to charity, she threw a fundraising dinner headlined by former President Bill Clinton, who has used his global star power to encourage large-scale philanthropy that stresses accountability. Mehta declared the first gathering of her Fortune Forum, held Sept. 26, 2006, a rousing success. The event raised about $1.5 million ... snip ...

But success came with a steep price. Fundraising costs consumed more than half of the proceeds, with $450,000 going to Clinton as a speaking fee, one of the largest he has collected as personal income, according to Sen. Hillary Clinton’s federal financial disclosure forms. ... snip ...

“We were a charity, but he wouldn’t come without that, so we paid it,” said Vijay Mehta, a co-founder of the Fortune Forum who is Renu Mehta’s father.
Click to expand...

And here is another good reason I doubt you (I'm beginning to think you folks can't say anything about the Clintons without either lying or showing your ignorance of the facts).

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/05/u...l=1&adxnnlx=1207407943-3oLWqUeYU/w15C2GtleTjQ

It's an article in the NYTimes from 2008. You'd believe that source, wouldn't you? It indicates that on earnings of $109 million dollars since 2000, the Clintons' gave a total of $10.2 million to charity … almost all of it to the Clinton Foundation. Now that sounds like a lot (although no where near "most" of Bill's earnings like you claimed), but the article also notes that of the $10 million, less than half actually went out the door of the Foundatoin during that time, and most of that was given in 2008, after Hillary declared her run for President. So perhaps charity wasn't really the motivation for the giving.

Elsewhere in the article, it actually states that over those 8 years the Clintons' charitable giving fell short of even a 5 percent goal. The article notes, for example, that in 2002, "they reported income totaling $9.5 million and $115,000 in gifts to charity. All in all, their charitable contributions are a far cry from what you claimed. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it was just ignorance of the facts on your part. :D

Furthermore, by giving to their own foundation, they got to fund an organization that celebrates Bill (where he's still the Big Cheese). Isn't that generous? :rolleyes:

Don't kid yourself … this foundation is basically run for the benefit of the Clintons, their leftist agenda and their friends. Speaking of friends, it's surprising the number of former administration staff and supporters who've been involved in the foundation over the years.

For example, consider Bruce Lindsey, a former Clinton White House deputy counsel. He was a fixer for Clinton who was implicated in numerous illegalities during the Clinton years (and was even named as an unindicted co-conspirator). Wikipedia quotes Bill Burton, another former top Clinton official, as saying "There is no end to which Bruce wouldn't go for the president, There are things Bruce would do for the president that nobody else on Earth would do, and Bruce wouldn't even think twice about it." And Clinton used Executive Privilege to keep Lindsey from having to talk to investigators numerous times ... in the Riady campaign finance scandal, the Lewinsky matter and in Whitewater. And as a reward for his faithful service (i.e., keeping the skeletons buried), he is currently working as the Chief Executive Officer of the Clinton Foundation. And collecting a quarter million dollar salary while doing it. Such philantrophy. :rolleyes:

Or consider Terry McAuliffe. He's a big time Clinton supporter (former Chairman of Bill Clinton's election campaign) and got to lead the foundation's fundraising efforts and sits on its Board of Directors. In fact, in 2010 he was the Board's chaiman and may still be. And he's also tied to several Clinton and democratic party related scandals. Now granted, he apparently get formally paid for his work on the Board, but don't think he didn't otherwise benefit. ;)

Here's another Friend Of Bill, who is on the Foundation's Board of Directors. Cheryl Mills. She was Deputy Counsel for President Clinton … and up to her neck in illegalities during those years. For instance, FOIA division head Sonya Stewart testified under oath that during Congress and Judicial Watch's Chinagate investigations Mills withheld documents in violation of court orders. She was implicated in Emailgate. Representative David McIntosh, chairman of the House Government Reform and Oversight subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs sent Attorney General Janet Reno a referral involving potential perjury and obstruction of justice charges against Mills. And she admitted withholding documents for 15 months, including a memo suggesting Clinton wanted the $1.7 million White House Office Data Base illegally shared with the DNC. And as rewards for her *faithful* service, she not only gets to sit on the Foundation's Board, she became Hillary's campaign chairman and chief fund-raiser, and is now Counselor and Chief of Staff to Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.

And what about the Clintons' charitable giving since 2008? In 2009, when Hillary was seeking the Secretary of State spot, the Clintons were forced to reveal the donor list for their foundation going all the way back to it's formation. And that list shows that the Clintons gave a total of between 1 and 5 million dollars over the years (http://www.clintonfoundation.org/contributors/pages/page_1.html ). Thus, the $10 million claim in the NYTimes 2008 article may be questionable. And again, that amount is a far cry from "most" of Bill's income since leaving the Whitehouse.

So we'd have to judge your claim, FALSE, crossbow. :D
 
BenBurch said:
Why should there be any expectation that he will give any of the money away?

He earned every dime.

Is this a free country, or are we going to force all former presidents to live a paupers?
Click to expand...

Only the Democratic ones.
 
Why couldn't Bill Clinton and his aides have some nice friends like Mr. Bush has, such as the pleasant Mr. Abramoff.
 
 
 
BeAChooser said:
It's an article in the NYTimes from 2008. You'd believe that source, wouldn't you? It indicates that on earnings of $109 million dollars since 2000, the Clintons' gave a total of $10.2 million to charity … almost all of it to the Clinton Foundation. Now that sounds like a lot (although no where near "most" of Bill's earnings like you claimed), but the article also notes that of the $10 million, less than half actually went out the door of the Foundatoin during that time, and most of that was given in 2008, after Hillary declared her run for President. So perhaps charity wasn't really the motivation for the giving.

Elsewhere in the article, it actually states that over those 8 years the Clintons' charitable giving fell short of even a 5 percent goal. The article notes, for example, that in 2002, "they reported income totaling $9.5 million and $115,000 in gifts to charity. All in all, their charitable contributions are a far cry from what you claimed. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it was just ignorance of the facts on your part. :D
Click to expand...

Obviously, we need to tax the rest out of him, because people can't be allowed to earn that much money. Right, BAC?
 
BeAChooser;7362395Disgusting. Says an awful lot about those who shelled out such sums to a man who has probably violated just about every law that could be violated. A sign of our times said:
dude......when bush spoke in calgery last year, people paid $1000 to hear him and he made $100,000 for his speech.
now that's disgusting, because, he actually is a bona fide war criminal.
Click to expand...
 
BeAChooser said:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/58770.html



Disgusting. Says an awful lot about those who shelled out such sums to a man who has probably violated just about every law that could be violated. A sign of our times, I guess.

Also from the above …



LIAR.

Hillary had enough money to play the cattle futures back in those early day, somewhat mysteriously making nearly $100,000 in just 10 months of trading. Surely she wasn't gambling what she couldn't afford to gamble? ;)

And one has to wonder where some of the brown paper bags of cash that floated into the Whitehouse from Red China actually went. We know for a fact that Hillary's personal secretary accepted (illegally, by the way) some of those brown paper sacks. :D

Perhaps some of that money went into a Swiss bank account? Why do I suggest this? Because Vince Foster was the Clintons' personal attorney. And he made a lot of one-day trips to Switzerland just prior to and during the Clinton Presidency. One has to wonder whether those trips were connected to the Clintons since nothing has come out suggesting Foster himself had a reason to go.

Furthermore, Foster handled the establishment of the Clintons' blind trust after Bill became President. And it must have been a big, complicated trust (suggesting lots of assets) because he spent months and month and months preparing it … much longer than it took previous Presidents to establish their blind trusts. He was running 6 months behind schedule. In fact, he wasn't finished at the time he died (although curiously, it was completed just three days after his death … with his signature on it). Maybe the delay came from figuring out how to hide fraudulent assets.

For example, the Clinton's claimed to own no house. Yet Carolyn Huber later testified that a file cabinet in the private residence contained paperwork on the Clinton's "condo". What else wasn't listed? Obviously, inconsistencies like these would have caused Foster a great deal of problems. And would belie Hillary's claim they had no money before leaving the White House.

:D
Click to expand...

Yay capitalism!;)
 
BeAChooser said:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/58770.html



Disgusting. Says an awful lot about those who shelled out such sums to a man who has probably violated just about every law that could be violated. A sign of our times, I guess.
<snip>
Click to expand...

Okay, you're upset about how much money he's made from speeches, which to be fair is a ludicrous amount. I can follow, I share similar outrage about exorbitant speaking fees, it's nice that we can agree on--

Hillary had enough money to play the cattle futures back in those early day, somewhat mysteriously making nearly $100,000 in just 10 months of trading. Surely she wasn't gambling what she couldn't afford to gamble? ;)

And one has to wonder where some of the brown paper bags of cash that floated into the Whitehouse from Red China actually went. We know for a fact that Hillary's personal secretary accepted (illegally, by the way) some of those brown paper sacks. :D

Perhaps some of that money went into a Swiss bank account? Why do I suggest this? Because Vince Foster was the Clintons' personal attorney. And he made a lot of one-day trips to Switzerland just prior to and during the Clinton Presidency. One has to wonder whether those trips were connected to the Clintons since nothing has come out suggesting Foster himself had a reason to go.

Furthermore, Foster handled the establishment of the Clintons' blind trust after Bill became President. And it must have been a big, complicated trust (suggesting lots of assets) because he spent months and month and months preparing it … much longer than it took previous Presidents to establish their blind trusts. He was running 6 months behind schedule. In fact, he wasn't finished at the time he died (although curiously, it was completed just three days after his death … with his signature on it). Maybe the delay came from figuring out how to hide fraudulent assets.

For example, the Clinton's claimed to own no house. Yet Carolyn Huber later testified that a file cabinet in the private residence contained paperwork on the Clinton's "condo". What else wasn't listed? Obviously, inconsistencies like these would have caused Foster a great deal of problems. And would belie Hillary's claim they had no money before leaving the White House.

:D
Click to expand...

WHOA! Whoa! Wait a minute! I thought we were talking about speaking fees and how much money he's made just by talking to people! Whoa! What just happened! All of a sudden it's 1998 again! How did this happen?
 
When even the other Conservatives on JREF are mocking you, maybe you've stepped a little too far in to derp-land.
 
eeyore1954 said:
I pretty much heard all of the President Clinton theories from my sister. Ron Brown, Vince Foster, cocaine snorting, etc and have no desire now to debate them. It takes a lot of time to read your posts and I have neither the time nor the energy.
Click to expand...

Hey, you're the one who brought up Foster, not I.

And it takes a lot of time to read, assimilate and understand all the facts.

Which is perhaps why so many democrats have given millions of dollars to a complete scoundrel.

Were taken in by his boyish affect and glib tongue.

Reading and thinking is sooooo hard in comparison. ;)
 
BeAChooser said:
Hey, you're the one who brought up Foster, not I.
Click to expand...

You can't even keep your own BS straight anymore. From your OP:

BeAChooser said:
Perhaps some of that money went into a Swiss bank account? Why do I suggest this? Because Vince Foster was the Clintons' personal attorney. And he made a lot of one-day trips to Switzerland just prior to and during the Clinton Presidency. One has to wonder whether those trips were connected to the Clintons since nothing has come out suggesting Foster himself had a reason to go.

Furthermore, Foster handled the establishment of the Clintons' blind trust after Bill became President. And it must have been a big, complicated trust (suggesting lots of assets) because he spent months and month and months preparing it … much longer than it took previous Presidents to establish their blind trusts. He was running 6 months behind schedule. In fact, he wasn't finished at the time he died (although curiously, it was completed just three days after his death … with his signature on it). Maybe the delay came from figuring out how to hide fraudulent assets.

For example, the Clinton's claimed to own no house. Yet Carolyn Huber later testified that a file cabinet in the private residence contained paperwork on the Clinton's "condo". What else wasn't listed? Obviously, inconsistencies like these would have caused Foster a great deal of problems. And would belie Hillary's claim they had no money before leaving the White House.

:biggrin:
Click to expand...


:D :D :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom