Topic: Is Hillary Clinton Trustworthy? - page 88. (Read 234761 times)

She's just as trustworthy as any other politician. So not very much.

They all have an agenda and make decisions based on who pays for their campaign. People have to be really stupid to think that any one of them give a fuck about your well-being. 

You want change? Get rich and pay $10k at a time to have lunches with senators and tell them what kind of laws you think should be changed or added.

I don't have any hope of someone defeating Hillary in 2016. On the bright side (sort of), I said the same thing in 2007 about 2008.

The main thing I'm wondering right now is how long the media can keep Hillary's use of a walker secret. It's hard to believe after almost a year it's still being kept under wraps.

We can trust that she will avariciously pursue her own interests and those of her $$$$$ people.

We can trust that she will indignantly claim to be the champion of the middle class, women, minorities and a host of other special interest groups, all of which she will forget about once they've whored themselves to her.

I find it hard to believe that anyone, after watching these people for years, would actually vote for her.  As a society The US is well and truly fucked if this is what people are willing to vote for.

We need "Hope for America" and what we get is a huge pile of smelly crap. I hope Rand Paul does well, because none of the others have much to offer.

Brilliant this should be a crowd funded billboard add 

The only positive foreign policy Hillary has accomplished is to boost Cuban exports to the US

I trust Hillary Clinton to be/do evil.

That matches much of what I remember about Bill's serious crimes.
Years ago, I met a Republican grassroots activist who was very active in he early movement to impeach Clinton. There was strong evidence of serious crimes (treason) and instead the impeachment was turned into a "sex circus" starring Monica and Her Amazing Cigar. Searching....
What? Is this a joke or real?  
Hillary Furious American’s Send Thousands of Cigars to Her Office!

"Thousands of cigars have been sent to Hillary Clinton’s office in protest of her announcement that she will run for President in 2016, and reports are that she’s FURIOUS!
Thanks to Send Clinton Cigars (http://sendclintoncigars.com), a service that allows you to anonymously purchase and send a cigar directly to Hillary’s campaign office. Tens of thousands of American’s are blatantly reminding her of her experience the first time around in the White House."

Amazing how much time and effort I waste in this forum replying to shit that can't be fixed and doesn't matter nor accomplish anything.

Can't I do anything productive with my time?


 

Google it.

Where is the poll so I can vote that she is a sociopath?

And anyone who votes is an idiot.

Amazing how much time and effort you fools waste in this forum discussing shit that can't be fixed and doesn't matter nor accomplish anything.

Can't you fools do anything productive with your time?

BYE!

Charity watchdog: Clinton Foundation a ‘slush fund’

The Clinton Foundation’s finances are so messy that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put it on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits last month.

The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.

The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.

On its 2013 tax forms, the most recent available, the foundation claimed it spent $30 million on payroll and employee benefits; $8.7 million in rent and office expenses; $9.2 million on “conferences, conventions and meetings”; $8 million on fundraising; and nearly $8.5 million on travel. None of the Clintons is on the payroll, but they do enjoy first-class flights paid for by the foundation.

In all, the group reported $84.6 million in “functional expenses” on its 2013 tax return and had more than $64 million left over — money the organization has said represents pledges rather than actual cash on hand.

Some of the tens of millions in administrative costs finance more than 2,000 employees, including aid workers and health professionals around the world.

But that’s still far below the 75 percent rate of spending that nonprofit experts say a good charity should spend on its mission.

More...http://nypost.com/2015/04/26/charity-watchdog-clinton-foundation-a-slush-fund/

The best part was afterwards when they had on the Clinton defense team in one, Donna Brazile, who's a former strategist for them back during Bill's reign in the 90s. She was just in a tizzy trying to obfuscate the facts. The Clintons are smart and they knew the way they were going to play this before they even started when she became SOS. Bill took similar money from the Chinese and Asian conglomerates back during his presidency and then had one of his Chinese pointmen as the head of the Commerce department granting export waivers on sensitive communication and advanced weapons systems which allowed them to flow over to China to help upgrade their satellite and missile technology - which was a major case for bribery and treason that should've been his demise during the impeachment. Instead, the so-called independent counsel just went after him for perjury and obstruction of justice that carried no meaningful penalties. This will ultimately be the extent of any punishment, or slap on the hand, that Hillary may get, not what she deserves. It's obviously serious or you wouldn't have democratic operatives nervous or concerned about it.

Peter Schweizer Appears on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos to Discuss CLINTON CASH

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=11&v=8hc6ESwRf8c

Behind the Man Who Outed Clinton’s Cash



It’s a mistake for the Clinton campaign to write off conservative author Peter Schweizer as a right-wing hack. It won’t work, and it’s not true. If he were as off-base as the campaign and its allies portray him, would a high-quality publication like The New York Times risk its reputation by partnering with him? And would Common Cause, the gold standard for good-government groups, which is currently chaired by former Clinton labor secretary Robert Reich, be calling for an independent review that would be made public of all large donations to the Clinton Foundation?

The Clintons have a standard template for pushing back, and they’re going to use it to make questions about their finances seem part of the vast right-wing conspiracy, but character assassination only goes so far. It may work for a while, but if the data in Schweizer’s upcoming book, Clinton Cash, survives the vetting it will get from the mainstream media, Clinton will have to clean up her act. Aside from actual wrongdoing, and there’s no evidence of that, this is about the appearance of conflicts of interest, and in politics, appearances are everything.   

The most damaging concerns have to do with foreign money seeping into the Clinton family foundation and whether any of that money found its way to her campaign. Should she become president, would these foreign friends that have enriched the Clinton Foundation and the Clintons themselves through exorbitant speaking fees receive preferential treatment?

“If I were a foreign government, I know which horse I would back,” says Craig Holman, public affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen. Holman was on Capitol Hill in 2011 promoting legislation to ban insider trading by members of Congress when he got a call from 60 Minutes producer Ira Rosen looking for a story. The Stock Act (Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge) only had nine sponsors, but Rosen picked up on it and, as Holman related the story to The Daily Beast, 60 Minutes partnered with Schweizer. Six months later the show aired a blockbuster story accusing Democrat Nancy Pelosi and Republicans John Boehner and Spencer Baucus, who chaired the House Financial Services Committee, of profiting from financial trades based on insider information they had access to as members of Congress.

Overnight, the Stock Act had 270 sponsors after languishing for years in multiple Congresses after Democrat Louise Slaughter first introduced it in 2006. “It was like paper clips to metal,” recalls Stephen Spalding with Common Cause. Five months after the 60 Minutes report, President Obama signed the Stock Act into law, praising the legislation as “a good and necessary thing,” and saying, “We were sent here to serve the American people and look out for their interests—not to look out for our own interests.”

Schweizer’s book, Throw Them All Out, was the centerpiece of the 60 Minutes expose. He was quoted at the time saying, “It’s not about the money, it’s about a sense of entitlement,” politicians feeling the rules don’t apply to them—the same arguments he’s making in his examination of the Clintons and their intertwined financial interests.

The politicians singled out by Schweizer pushed back hard and there were lots of disputes about whether he had his facts right. Drew Hammill, Pelosi’s spokesman, countered every allegation and called it “troubling that 60 Minutes would base their reporting off of an already-discredited conservative author who has made a career out of attacking Democrats.”

Even so, the good-government community was cheering. A bill that would otherwise never have passed breezed through both houses of Congress. With inside information the coin of the realm on Capitol Hill, the Stock Act made it clear that staffers and members could not use this knowledge to trade and enrich themselves. Schweizer found enough individual examples that the bill took off “and that’s a feather in his cap,” says Spalding.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/04/27/behind-the-man-who-outed-clinton-s-cash.html

Fleeing Hillary: Top Dem money man departs because Clinton hasn’t answered ethics questions



A top Democratic moneyman recruited by Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign has put fundraising activities on hold, saying he can’t do it with a clear conscience because the former secretary of state has too many unanswered questions swirling around her.

New York businessman Jon Cooper, who Team Clinton enlisted for its elite corps of early fundraisers known as “HillStarters,” said that he decided not to tap his donor network for Mrs. Clinton because she hasn’t provided enough answers about foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation while she ran the State Department, her exclusive use of private email for official business as America’s top diplomat and her commitment to liberal priorities.

“I’m officially on the fence,” said Mr. Cooper, a bundler for President Obama’s campaigns who is active in Democratic politics in New York, which Mrs. Clinton represented in the U.S. Senate and where she has set up her campaign headquarters.

Mr. Cooper said he was writing a fundraising email to the roughly 10,000 people in his network when he realized that his heart wasn’t in it.

“I was sitting there trying to draft the email, and I just couldn’t do it,” he told The Washington Times.

Mr. Cooper, who is openly gay and married to longtime partner Robert Cooper, said he was disappointed with how long it took Mrs. Clinton to support gay marriage as a constitutional right plus her reluctance to back a liberal economic agenda, including raising the federal minimum wage.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/26/hillary-clinton-foreign-donations-email-agenda-que/

I really hope they nail her ass to the wall but I know that won't happen so the second best outcome is for the public to see these lowlifes for what they truly are and write them off completely forever. The amount of bribery and treason that the Clintons have participated in so eloquently and w/o retribution, it makes me sick.

This has real potential to invite several other Democrats into the race.
Looks like fun...

STEPHANOPOULOS FLOORED AS GINGRICH, BLOOMBERG EDITORS DETAIL SERIOUSNESS OF ‘CLINTON CASH

The former public face of Bill Clinton’s White House—and current host of ABC News’ This Week—George Stephanopoulos was floored as two prominent journalists and the Republican Speaker of the House from his Clinton days, Newt Gingrich, laid out for him just how bad the “Clinton Cash” book is for his old bosses.

During the show’s roundtable panel after Clinton Cash author Peter Schweizer appeared on the show for a lengthy interview, Stephanopoulos teamed with Democratic strategist Donna Brazile in an attempt to discredit Schweizer. But it started with Stephanopoulos making a shocking admission: Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign wouldn’t send out any official surrogates or spokespeople to defend her on this scandal.

More: http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/04/26/stephanopoulos-floored-as-gingrich-bloomberg-editors-detail-seriousness-of-clinton-cash/

No, HRC does not represent the progressive's wet dream in any way, shape, or form (aside from the radical feminist fetish for her vagina).

You need to get that through your head if you want to help defeat her.

The DNC takes its principled prog wing for granted, exactly like the RNC does with its libertarian fringe.

HRC is despised by progs, just as McCain was despised by libertarians.

Their big issues are NAFTA-cum-TPP, her WalMart exec status, pro-Iraq/Libya war votes, etc.

Learn them by heart.  Use them to sow discord in Democrat ranks.

Otherwise the progs will hold their nose and vote against the Evil Republican, despite being our allies on issues like NSA/Google fascism, the War on Drugs, and corporate welfare reform.