Soul-Searching at Clinton Foundation in Trump Era - page 3

With nothing left to sell they are laying off over 100 people!! I bet you Bill's salary isnt getting cut. The Clinton Foundation is a money laundering fraud and the Clintons are the most... Read More

  1. by   Markperry
    Quote from heron
    Why are we talking about this? So that we don't ask questions about Trump's own corruption, the war he and Bannon are trying to start, and restructuring investigations into domestic terrorism to focus on foreigners instead of the people actually committing or advocating terrorist acts on US soil: white supremacists, dominionists, sovereign citizens and the forced pregnancy movement (to name a few).

    And that's just for starters.
    Cry me a Schumer.................
  2. by   toomuchbaloney
    Quote from heron
    Why are we talking about this? So that we don't ask questions about Trump's own corruption, the war he and Bannon are trying to start, and restructuring investigations into domestic terrorism to focus on foreigners instead of the people actually committing or advocating terrorist acts on US soil: white supremacists, dominionists, sovereign citizens and the forced pregnancy movement (to name a few).

    And that's just for starters.
    Indeed
    It is classic manipulation of the weak minded. Those in power want the attentions of the people focused other than on what they have done and are doing. Republicans do not want people thinking or talking about the relevant bullcrap that they are engaged in and so they distract their angry voting base with more fabrications and fantasies about a private citizen.

    Clinton isn't being blackmailed by Putin but Trump likely is. Clinton didn't try to remove ethics rules or independent ethics reviews, Republicans did. Clinton gave speeches to Goldman Sachs while Trump gave the financial reins of the country to them. Clinton isn't going to gut consumer protections and public safety nets but Republicans are.

    And on and on and on.

    The fixation on Clinton that is exploited by the GOP is unhealthy and symptomatic of a population which is unable to critically think about politics. This thread is a perfect example of someone who is clearly being manipulated by the media they consume. Some of these folks literally believe that Breitbart, The Blaze, or Alex Jones are more trustworthy and factual than CNN. Because they've been told that by the people who want to control what they know and believe.

    While the POTUS and his staff are engaged installing fascism into the executive branch their gullible apologists are spinning their wheels worrying about the Clinton Foundation. They care more about that "nasty woman" than about their country, Medicare, Social Security, or presidential conflicts of interest.

    Heck

    We have a white supremacist sitting on the NSC because Trump wasn't fully aware of the documents that he was signing yet these poor people think that we should be worried about Clinton.
  3. by   elkpark
    Quote from Markperry
    You are like a broken record.

    We know for sure the DNC interfered with the election. We know for sure by leaked emails that the DNC was supportive of Hillary and made it difficult if not almost impossible for Bernie to win the primaries.

    I think the next DNC leader was caught giving questions to Hillary.

    Instead of an investigation and charges, the person was allowed to walk. Debbie Schultz should of been relieved from office and no longer allowed to represent her people, but instead she is still working in the House.

    It was so funny how that was swept under the rug
    What "charges"? While I disapprove of Brazile sharing one of the debate questions with the Clinton campaign, is there some law against that? Leaking debate questions? What are the penalties for that, if you're found guilty in a court of law of leaking debate questions? What on earth did Wasserman-Schultz do that violated any law, or should get her removed from her House seat?

    As for the DNC favoring Clinton over Sanders, the primaries are not "elections" in the real sense; they are internal matters within the various political parties. I admit it's confusing because they look like regular, "real" elections (and what I don't understand is why the states pay for them, instead of the individual parties paying for them), but they have no real legal standing -- the parties could just as easily go back to the party leadership choosing the candidate in the proverbial "smoke-filled room," like they used to. Apart from violating any actual laws, the inner workings of the Democratic or Republican parties are no one's business but the party membership. Clinton has been a faithful, hard-working Democrat for decades; Sanders was an independent who didn't even register as a Democrat until he decided he wanted to run for president. I think that Clinton was an unfortunate choice as a candidate, but does it really surprise anyone that the Democratic party leadership would favor her over Sanders? And, apart from some individuals' righteous indignation about that, did they break some law or regulation by doing so?

    Of course you are looking for anything you can use to criticize and demonize the Dems. I'll bet that a good chunk of the GOP has been wishing for a while now that the GOP had exercised a little more control over their nomination process ...

    Again, your side won. Why are you still making a big deal about any of this? I've never seen such a bunch of "sore winners" as the Republicans. But, of course, y'all need to keep making a lot of noise about the Democrats in order to distract everyone from the multitudinous failings of the new Groper-in-Chief.
  4. by   margin261
    I think I covered this in another thread (or possibly here, just an earlier post)- but I'll repeat it for those that need to hear it again.

    WE are over the election- you trumpkins are the ones having trouble letting go. When you don't have the big bad Hillary boogeyman to compare trump to, well, you see much of his shine is as fake as his hair. It's why they constantly compare his failings to what they consider to be hers: "Don't look at the horror show here, folks! Remember Benghazi! Emails!"
    When you try to let trump stand on his on merits- he fails miserably!

    Or, for a really good laugh, why don't you pick out a president you have some respect for- and see how trump measures up against him!!

    Tweety-
    trump tweeted today that if polls are negative towards him, they're fake news.
    i.e. If the news prints stuff he doesn't like/isn't supportive of him- he considers it fake news.

    I just thought I'd add that in since we discussed just that topic recently
  5. by   Markperry
    Quote from margin261
    Or, for a really good laugh, why don't you pick out a president you have some respect for- and see how trump measures up against him!!
    I was fan of Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. But we will need at least 4 years to compare Presidents, Time is the great equalizer and history will be the judge of a President.
  6. by   toomuchbaloney
    Quote from margin261
    I think I covered this in another thread (or possibly here, just an earlier post)- but I'll repeat it for those that need to hear it again.

    WE are over the election- you trumpkins are the ones having trouble letting go. When you don't have the big bad Hillary boogeyman to compare trump to, well, you see much of his shine is as fake as his hair. It's why they constantly compare his failings to what they consider to be hers: "Don't look at the horror show here, folks! Remember Benghazi! Emails!"
    When you try to let trump stand on his on merits- he fails miserably!

    Or, for a really good laugh, why don't you pick out a president you have some respect for- and see how trump measures up against him!!

    Tweety-
    trump tweeted today that if polls are negative towards him, they're fake news.
    i.e. If the news prints stuff he doesn't like/isn't supportive of him- he considers it fake news.

    I just thought I'd add that in since we discussed just that topic recently
    Trump's open hostility to the press with overt and brazen attempts to sell the public lies by berating the reporting of fact is a walk down fascism lane.
    A brisk walk.

    The Trump administration will, at minimum, go down in the history books as the least factual, honest, or transparent in modern history.
  7. by   elkpark
    Quote from toomuchbaloney
    Trump's open hostility to the press with overt and brazen attempts to sell the public lies by berating the reporting of fact is a walk down fascism lane.
    A brisk walk.

    The Trump administration will, at minimum, go down in the history books as the least factual, honest, or transparent in modern history.
    Saw this article today. It's a long read, but really interesting (and really scary ...):

    How Donald Trump Could Build an Autocracy in the U.S. - The Atlantic
  8. by   Avid reader
    MarkPerry, [/and equally I am not offended by what Trump said while chatting with a buddy. I talk much worse when I am alone with my buddies out hunting or fishing.]

    How about this perspective Markperry, a 70 year old man, who feels that insecure that he needs to impress a young man 1/3 his age with such trash talk? Analysis maybe beyond your reach with all the need for the gay pastimes of hunting and fishing with your "buddies"


    Do you understand at all how insecure you have to be to feel that way? There should be miles of daylight re maturity between those two and he still feels the need to impress. He should be the dominant male and brought himself down to a level even lower than his audience. That affected me far more than his misogyny.
    What does it say about you? Are you digging up another wife beating video?

Must Read Topics


close