login
Election 2016 (Page 12)
-
No new posts
|
 2016-08-17 5:04 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Elite  4547   |  Subject: RE: Election 2016Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Bob Loblaw Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Bob Loblaw Originally posted by tuwood He cares about American people and our soldiers. He doesn't want to engage in interventionist wars to appease the defense industry lobby. Where do you think those trillions of dollars spent have gone? In comparison Hillary will most definitely continue with the interventionist pro-war industry policies of the Bush's/Obama. Nobody in the US will ever use Nuclear weapons so it's the stupidest argument against Trump the Dems and media have made to date. Seriously, the only thing worse is that you buy into it. Obama couldn't even pass a Top Secret background check, but the Republicans in all their vitriol towards him never stooped to this level of stupidity. The fact that Republicans made this ridiculous claim in the first place is proof of how low they'll stoop. Or, you know, when Trump says Obama founded ISIS. That's a pretty low level of stupidity. This is factually true, so I don't know what you're talking about it being a low level of stupid. No birther issues required, Obama was born a triple citizen (US, Kenyan, and UK) due to his father being a Kenyan Citizen (which was a British colony at the time) and had traveled to many foreign countries, including Pakistan which was a banned country) throughout his youth. We had several guys on my ship in the Navy who were dual citizens and they couldn't even get a Secret clearance and were forced to do more menial jobs as a result. It's not factually true. He was born in this country, never pledged allegiance to Kenya, and never renounced his US citizenship. He lost his Kenyan citizenship when he became an adult (and had lost his UK citizenship long before that). The State Department has their eligibility for access to classified information guidelines available online (here). Guideline C states a dual citizenship may be a disqualifying factor. It also says a mitigating factor is if the dual citizenship is based solely on the parents' citizenship. So at best it would mean he would have been subject to additional scrutiny before being approved/rejected for classified information, which is a far cry from Republicans saying he could not pass the background check. But it doesn't matter anyway because by the time he was of military age, he was no longer had dual citizenship. You're making my point for me by pointing out the absurdity of the argument against Obama and more importantly the irrelevance of it. He didn't ever have to go through a background check or a security clearance check because he won the election and was simply granted the clearance. Tony, you wrote: " It's utterly absurd to suggest that he can't have the Nuclear codes because he doesn't bow down to the alter of political correctness. I was not referencing Donald Trump's dislike of political correctness as a reason for his not being fit to authorize military action. I was referring to the fact, f a c t, that the guy has a short temper and tends to lash out without thinking ahead. That's it in a nutshell. There are plenty of well-spoken, well thought-out figures who eschew political correctness, who if they had run, I would not have deemed them risks to our national security. They aren't using childish name calling, and they're not sending out idiotic tweets at all hours of the night either. President Obama's got more class in his pinky finger than Donald Trump has ever had. A president needs to be calm, cool, and collected. If we were faced with a Trump win in November, it really would be like going from Class to Crass. |
| 2016-08-17 5:36 PM in reply to: 0 |
Master 5557  , California | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by spudone He didn't ever have to go through a background check or a security clearance check because he won the election and was simply granted the clearance. I don't really get your argument here. He was a U.S. Senator. I don't know what clearance they get but Obama certainly wasn't the first senator who later became president.
My guess is as a senator he had a secret level clearance with a standard background investigation. As POTUS he would need a top secret clearance with a SSBI and then numerous special access caveats. The difference in levels means for the secret level they might talk to your neighbors.....for a top secret they might hunt down your high school biology teacher and your landlord in college and visit every police department in every town you ever lived in. My guess is he was given a pass on the top secret. As POTUS he can grant himself a waiver if they did find something in his past. :-). Mm he was on a Homeland Security committee, quite possibly had top secret clearance already. But yeah it is not the same for all senators across the board, from what I can tell. Edited by spudone 2016-08-17 5:37 PM |
| 2016-08-17 10:13 PM in reply to: spudone |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by spudone Believe it or not there is zero background check for potus.The American people and the media are the background check.He didn't ever have to go through a background check or a security clearance check because he won the election and was simply granted the clearance. I don't really get your argument here. He was a U.S. Senator. I don't know what clearance they get but Obama certainly wasn't the first senator who later became president. |
| 2016-08-17 10:16 PM in reply to: ChineseDemocracy |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy Where does it say you have to be calm and collected to be president? Some of our greatest presidents have had some serious personality issues. You're falling into the political correct trap of making demeanor and personality the only thing that's important.Originally posted by tuwood Tony, you wrote: " It's utterly absurd to suggest that he can't have the Nuclear codes because he doesn't bow down to the alter of political correctness.I was not referencing Donald Trump's dislike of political correctness as a reason for his not being fit to authorize military action. I was referring to the fact, f a c t, that the guy has a short temper and tends to lash out without thinking ahead. That's it in a nutshell.There are plenty of well-spoken, well thought-out figures who eschew political correctness, who if they had run, I would not have deemed them risks to our national security.They aren't using childish name calling, and they're not sending out idiotic tweets at all hours of the night either. President Obama's got more class in his pinky finger than Donald Trump has ever had.A president needs to be calm, cool, and collected.If we were faced with a Trump win in November, it really would be like going from Class to Crass.Originally posted by Bob Loblaw Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Bob Loblaw Originally posted by tuwood He cares about American people and our soldiers. He doesn't want to engage in interventionist wars to appease the defense industry lobby. Where do you think those trillions of dollars spent have gone? In comparison Hillary will most definitely continue with the interventionist pro-war industry policies of the Bush's/Obama. Nobody in the US will ever use Nuclear weapons so it's the stupidest argument against Trump the Dems and media have made to date. Seriously, the only thing worse is that you buy into it. Obama couldn't even pass a Top Secret background check, but the Republicans in all their vitriol towards him never stooped to this level of stupidity. The fact that Republicans made this ridiculous claim in the first place is proof of how low they'll stoop. Or, you know, when Trump says Obama founded ISIS. That's a pretty low level of stupidity. This is factually true, so I don't know what you're talking about it being a low level of stupid. No birther issues required, Obama was born a triple citizen (US, Kenyan, and UK) due to his father being a Kenyan Citizen (which was a British colony at the time) and had traveled to many foreign countries, including Pakistan which was a banned country) throughout his youth. We had several guys on my ship in the Navy who were dual citizens and they couldn't even get a Secret clearance and were forced to do more menial jobs as a result. It's not factually true. He was born in this country, never pledged allegiance to Kenya, and never renounced his US citizenship. He lost his Kenyan citizenship when he became an adult (and had lost his UK citizenship long before that). The State Department has their eligibility for access to classified information guidelines available online (here). Guideline C states a dual citizenship may be a disqualifying factor. It also says a mitigating factor is if the dual citizenship is based solely on the parents' citizenship. So at best it would mean he would have been subject to additional scrutiny before being approved/rejected for classified information, which is a far cry from Republicans saying he could not pass the background check. But it doesn't matter anyway because by the time he was of military age, he was no longer had dual citizenship. You're making my point for me by pointing out the absurdity of the argument against Obama and more importantly the irrelevance of it. He didn't ever have to go through a background check or a security clearance check because he won the election and was simply granted the clearance. |
| 2016-08-18 7:57 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol |
| 2016-08-18 8:36 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by tuwood Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. |
| 2016-08-18 8:47 AM in reply to: ejshowers |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
|
| 2016-08-18 9:07 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
I am not much into conspiracy theories, but I see no motivation for the Clinton's to do anything illegal around this. None. |
| 2016-08-18 9:34 AM in reply to: ejshowers |
Champion 10154 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I am not much into conspiracy theories, but I see no motivation for the Clinton's to do anything illegal around this. None. Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
Motivation? Money! The love of money is the root of all evil. Think about this. You are a company and have XX million allocated to give to charity. You can give to any number of charitable causes from Red Cross to Save the Whales. But rather than give money to them, you give money to the Clinton Foundation and let them decide where your money should go. The very nature of the Clinton Foundation is suspicious. A former US President who is one of the most politically connected and powerful people in the country, and the US Secretary of State who makes decisions every day that influence the world. Pretty much anything you need done in the world, these two can get it done for you. The problem is it is very hard to prove quid pro quo. Yes the Sec of State made a decision favored a company or government and coincidently that company or government gave 10 million to the Clinton foundation. The Clintons are not stupid. They know they can't take bribes directly. But if you give to my charity then there is no conflict. Now, if the Foundation happens to pay the founders a handsome 7 figure salary, but that's just what you pay big executives. The Clintons are like Al Capone. Everyone knew he was a brutal crime boss but he was smart enough to keep from being tied directly to crimes. Everyone knows the Clinton Foundation is front for the Clinton Crime Family but you will never be able to prove criminality. |
| 2016-08-18 9:39 AM in reply to: ejshowers |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I am not much into conspiracy theories, but I see no motivation for the Clinton's to do anything illegal around this. None. Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
I think money would be the primary motivator, but even that's complex because the charity is very complex. |
| 2016-08-18 10:03 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I am not much into conspiracy theories, but I see no motivation for the Clinton's to do anything illegal around this. None. Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
Motivation? Money! The love of money is the root of all evil. Think about this. You are a company and have XX million allocated to give to charity. You can give to any number of charitable causes from Red Cross to Save the Whales. But rather than give money to them, you give money to the Clinton Foundation and let them decide where your money should go. The very nature of the Clinton Foundation is suspicious. A former US President who is one of the most politically connected and powerful people in the country, and the US Secretary of State who makes decisions every day that influence the world. Pretty much anything you need done in the world, these two can get it done for you. The problem is it is very hard to prove quid pro quo. Yes the Sec of State made a decision favored a company or government and coincidently that company or government gave 10 million to the Clinton foundation. The Clintons are not stupid. They know they can't take bribes directly. But if you give to my charity then there is no conflict. Now, if the Foundation happens to pay the founders a handsome 7 figure salary, but that's just what you pay big executives. The Clintons are like Al Capone. Everyone knew he was a brutal crime boss but he was smart enough to keep from being tied directly to crimes. Everyone knows the Clinton Foundation is front for the Clinton Crime Family but you will never be able to prove criminality. But the foundation hasn't paid a Clinton a big salary! From their FAQ site: "Do the Clintons receive any income or personal expense reimbursement from the Foundation? No. President Clinton and Chelsea Clinton, who serve on the Board of Directors, do not take a salary from the Clinton Foundation and receive no funding from it. Secretary Clinton did not take a salary when she served on the Board of Directors." Can you show a 7 figure payment to a Clinton? |
| 2016-08-18 10:13 AM in reply to: ejshowers |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio But the foundation hasn't paid a Clinton a big salary! From their FAQ site: "Do the Clintons receive any income or personal expense reimbursement from the Foundation? No. President Clinton and Chelsea Clinton, who serve on the Board of Directors, do not take a salary from the Clinton Foundation and receive no funding from it. Secretary Clinton did not take a salary when she served on the Board of Directors." Can you show a 7 figure payment to a Clinton? Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I am not much into conspiracy theories, but I see no motivation for the Clinton's to do anything illegal around this. None. Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
Motivation? Money! The love of money is the root of all evil. Think about this. You are a company and have XX million allocated to give to charity. You can give to any number of charitable causes from Red Cross to Save the Whales. But rather than give money to them, you give money to the Clinton Foundation and let them decide where your money should go. The very nature of the Clinton Foundation is suspicious. A former US President who is one of the most politically connected and powerful people in the country, and the US Secretary of State who makes decisions every day that influence the world. Pretty much anything you need done in the world, these two can get it done for you. The problem is it is very hard to prove quid pro quo. Yes the Sec of State made a decision favored a company or government and coincidently that company or government gave 10 million to the Clinton foundation. The Clintons are not stupid. They know they can't take bribes directly. But if you give to my charity then there is no conflict. Now, if the Foundation happens to pay the founders a handsome 7 figure salary, but that's just what you pay big executives. The Clintons are like Al Capone. Everyone knew he was a brutal crime boss but he was smart enough to keep from being tied directly to crimes. Everyone knows the Clinton Foundation is front for the Clinton Crime Family but you will never be able to prove criminality. Reading between the lines is pretty easy on that legalesque statement. Basically Hillary was drawing a salary (who knows how much) before being SoS and after being SoS.
|
| 2016-08-18 10:21 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio But the foundation hasn't paid a Clinton a big salary! From their FAQ site: "Do the Clintons receive any income or personal expense reimbursement from the Foundation? No. President Clinton and Chelsea Clinton, who serve on the Board of Directors, do not take a salary from the Clinton Foundation and receive no funding from it. Secretary Clinton did not take a salary when she served on the Board of Directors." Can you show a 7 figure payment to a Clinton? Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I am not much into conspiracy theories, but I see no motivation for the Clinton's to do anything illegal around this. None. Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
Motivation? Money! The love of money is the root of all evil. Think about this. You are a company and have XX million allocated to give to charity. You can give to any number of charitable causes from Red Cross to Save the Whales. But rather than give money to them, you give money to the Clinton Foundation and let them decide where your money should go. The very nature of the Clinton Foundation is suspicious. A former US President who is one of the most politically connected and powerful people in the country, and the US Secretary of State who makes decisions every day that influence the world. Pretty much anything you need done in the world, these two can get it done for you. The problem is it is very hard to prove quid pro quo. Yes the Sec of State made a decision favored a company or government and coincidently that company or government gave 10 million to the Clinton foundation. The Clintons are not stupid. They know they can't take bribes directly. But if you give to my charity then there is no conflict. Now, if the Foundation happens to pay the founders a handsome 7 figure salary, but that's just what you pay big executives. The Clintons are like Al Capone. Everyone knew he was a brutal crime boss but he was smart enough to keep from being tied directly to crimes. Everyone knows the Clinton Foundation is front for the Clinton Crime Family but you will never be able to prove criminality. Reading between the lines is pretty easy on that legalesque statement. Basically Hillary was drawing a salary (who knows how much) before being SoS and after being SoS.
The Clintons have released all their tax returns and I don't think they ever showed a salary from the foundation. If so, please prove it. |
| 2016-08-18 10:23 AM in reply to: ejshowers |
Champion 10154 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio But the foundation hasn't paid a Clinton a big salary! From their FAQ site: "Do the Clintons receive any income or personal expense reimbursement from the Foundation? No. President Clinton and Chelsea Clinton, who serve on the Board of Directors, do not take a salary from the Clinton Foundation and receive no funding from it. Secretary Clinton did not take a salary when she served on the Board of Directors." Can you show a 7 figure payment to a Clinton? Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I am not much into conspiracy theories, but I see no motivation for the Clinton's to do anything illegal around this. None. Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
Motivation? Money! The love of money is the root of all evil. Think about this. You are a company and have XX million allocated to give to charity. You can give to any number of charitable causes from Red Cross to Save the Whales. But rather than give money to them, you give money to the Clinton Foundation and let them decide where your money should go. The very nature of the Clinton Foundation is suspicious. A former US President who is one of the most politically connected and powerful people in the country, and the US Secretary of State who makes decisions every day that influence the world. Pretty much anything you need done in the world, these two can get it done for you. The problem is it is very hard to prove quid pro quo. Yes the Sec of State made a decision favored a company or government and coincidently that company or government gave 10 million to the Clinton foundation. The Clintons are not stupid. They know they can't take bribes directly. But if you give to my charity then there is no conflict. Now, if the Foundation happens to pay the founders a handsome 7 figure salary, but that's just what you pay big executives. The Clintons are like Al Capone. Everyone knew he was a brutal crime boss but he was smart enough to keep from being tied directly to crimes. Everyone knows the Clinton Foundation is front for the Clinton Crime Family but you will never be able to prove criminality.
You don't have to take a salary when you have an unlimited expense account! If the Foundation has 'business' in Hawaii then they can charter a private jet to fly them and some of their guests to Hono and spend a week in a 5 star resort in the presidential suite. Then take a private helicopter to the best golf course in Maui where they pay a few rounds with potential donors. Expensive gifts to woo 'potential' donors with jewelry and $200k Rolex watches. Total expenses for the week $2.5 million. But hey, they aren't taking a salary!
|
| 2016-08-18 10:33 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio But the foundation hasn't paid a Clinton a big salary! From their FAQ site: "Do the Clintons receive any income or personal expense reimbursement from the Foundation? No. President Clinton and Chelsea Clinton, who serve on the Board of Directors, do not take a salary from the Clinton Foundation and receive no funding from it. Secretary Clinton did not take a salary when she served on the Board of Directors." Can you show a 7 figure payment to a Clinton? Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I am not much into conspiracy theories, but I see no motivation for the Clinton's to do anything illegal around this. None. Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
Motivation? Money! The love of money is the root of all evil. Think about this. You are a company and have XX million allocated to give to charity. You can give to any number of charitable causes from Red Cross to Save the Whales. But rather than give money to them, you give money to the Clinton Foundation and let them decide where your money should go. The very nature of the Clinton Foundation is suspicious. A former US President who is one of the most politically connected and powerful people in the country, and the US Secretary of State who makes decisions every day that influence the world. Pretty much anything you need done in the world, these two can get it done for you. The problem is it is very hard to prove quid pro quo. Yes the Sec of State made a decision favored a company or government and coincidently that company or government gave 10 million to the Clinton foundation. The Clintons are not stupid. They know they can't take bribes directly. But if you give to my charity then there is no conflict. Now, if the Foundation happens to pay the founders a handsome 7 figure salary, but that's just what you pay big executives. The Clintons are like Al Capone. Everyone knew he was a brutal crime boss but he was smart enough to keep from being tied directly to crimes. Everyone knows the Clinton Foundation is front for the Clinton Crime Family but you will never be able to prove criminality.
You don't have to take a salary when you have an unlimited expense account! If the Foundation has 'business' in Hawaii then they can charter a private jet to fly them and some of their guests to Hono and spend a week in a 5 star resort in the presidential suite. Then take a private helicopter to the best golf course in Maui where they pay a few rounds with potential donors. Expensive gifts to woo 'potential' donors with jewelry and $200k Rolex watches. Total expenses for the week $2.5 million. But hey, they aren't taking a salary!
So you can't show they took a salary sounds like. Then why did you say it! Words matter! |
| 2016-08-18 10:55 AM in reply to: ejshowers |
Champion 10154 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio So you can't show they took a salary sounds like. Then why did you say it! Words matter! Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio But the foundation hasn't paid a Clinton a big salary! From their FAQ site: "Do the Clintons receive any income or personal expense reimbursement from the Foundation? No. President Clinton and Chelsea Clinton, who serve on the Board of Directors, do not take a salary from the Clinton Foundation and receive no funding from it. Secretary Clinton did not take a salary when she served on the Board of Directors." Can you show a 7 figure payment to a Clinton? Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I am not much into conspiracy theories, but I see no motivation for the Clinton's to do anything illegal around this. None. Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
Motivation? Money! The love of money is the root of all evil. Think about this. You are a company and have XX million allocated to give to charity. You can give to any number of charitable causes from Red Cross to Save the Whales. But rather than give money to them, you give money to the Clinton Foundation and let them decide where your money should go. The very nature of the Clinton Foundation is suspicious. A former US President who is one of the most politically connected and powerful people in the country, and the US Secretary of State who makes decisions every day that influence the world. Pretty much anything you need done in the world, these two can get it done for you. The problem is it is very hard to prove quid pro quo. Yes the Sec of State made a decision favored a company or government and coincidently that company or government gave 10 million to the Clinton foundation. The Clintons are not stupid. They know they can't take bribes directly. But if you give to my charity then there is no conflict. Now, if the Foundation happens to pay the founders a handsome 7 figure salary, but that's just what you pay big executives. The Clintons are like Al Capone. Everyone knew he was a brutal crime boss but he was smart enough to keep from being tied directly to crimes. Everyone knows the Clinton Foundation is front for the Clinton Crime Family but you will never be able to prove criminality.
You don't have to take a salary when you have an unlimited expense account! If the Foundation has 'business' in Hawaii then they can charter a private jet to fly them and some of their guests to Hono and spend a week in a 5 star resort in the presidential suite. Then take a private helicopter to the best golf course in Maui where they pay a few rounds with potential donors. Expensive gifts to woo 'potential' donors with jewelry and $200k Rolex watches. Total expenses for the week $2.5 million. But hey, they aren't taking a salary!
You are arguing semantics. This is a part time job for them. Would you rather have a 'salary' or a virtually unlimited expense account? BTW, the Pope doesn't take a salary.....but he's not hurting for rent money. The POTUS salary is nothing compared to the $1.4 billion WH budget.
|
| 2016-08-18 11:05 AM in reply to: ejshowers |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio So you can't show they took a salary sounds like. Then why did you say it! Words matter! Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio But the foundation hasn't paid a Clinton a big salary! From their FAQ site: "Do the Clintons receive any income or personal expense reimbursement from the Foundation? No. President Clinton and Chelsea Clinton, who serve on the Board of Directors, do not take a salary from the Clinton Foundation and receive no funding from it. Secretary Clinton did not take a salary when she served on the Board of Directors." Can you show a 7 figure payment to a Clinton? Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I am not much into conspiracy theories, but I see no motivation for the Clinton's to do anything illegal around this. None. Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
Motivation? Money! The love of money is the root of all evil. Think about this. You are a company and have XX million allocated to give to charity. You can give to any number of charitable causes from Red Cross to Save the Whales. But rather than give money to them, you give money to the Clinton Foundation and let them decide where your money should go. The very nature of the Clinton Foundation is suspicious. A former US President who is one of the most politically connected and powerful people in the country, and the US Secretary of State who makes decisions every day that influence the world. Pretty much anything you need done in the world, these two can get it done for you. The problem is it is very hard to prove quid pro quo. Yes the Sec of State made a decision favored a company or government and coincidently that company or government gave 10 million to the Clinton foundation. The Clintons are not stupid. They know they can't take bribes directly. But if you give to my charity then there is no conflict. Now, if the Foundation happens to pay the founders a handsome 7 figure salary, but that's just what you pay big executives. The Clintons are like Al Capone. Everyone knew he was a brutal crime boss but he was smart enough to keep from being tied directly to crimes. Everyone knows the Clinton Foundation is front for the Clinton Crime Family but you will never be able to prove criminality.
You don't have to take a salary when you have an unlimited expense account! If the Foundation has 'business' in Hawaii then they can charter a private jet to fly them and some of their guests to Hono and spend a week in a 5 star resort in the presidential suite. Then take a private helicopter to the best golf course in Maui where they pay a few rounds with potential donors. Expensive gifts to woo 'potential' donors with jewelry and $200k Rolex watches. Total expenses for the week $2.5 million. But hey, they aren't taking a salary!
You know what else matters......not hiding behind a foundation and pretending you don't make a lot of money. Fork them.....lying, cheating, conniving, womanizing, fat ankled biatches.......both of them. |
| 2016-08-18 11:08 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio So you can't show they took a salary sounds like. Then why did you say it! Words matter! Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio But the foundation hasn't paid a Clinton a big salary! From their FAQ site: "Do the Clintons receive any income or personal expense reimbursement from the Foundation? No. President Clinton and Chelsea Clinton, who serve on the Board of Directors, do not take a salary from the Clinton Foundation and receive no funding from it. Secretary Clinton did not take a salary when she served on the Board of Directors." Can you show a 7 figure payment to a Clinton? Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I am not much into conspiracy theories, but I see no motivation for the Clinton's to do anything illegal around this. None. Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
Motivation? Money! The love of money is the root of all evil. Think about this. You are a company and have XX million allocated to give to charity. You can give to any number of charitable causes from Red Cross to Save the Whales. But rather than give money to them, you give money to the Clinton Foundation and let them decide where your money should go. The very nature of the Clinton Foundation is suspicious. A former US President who is one of the most politically connected and powerful people in the country, and the US Secretary of State who makes decisions every day that influence the world. Pretty much anything you need done in the world, these two can get it done for you. The problem is it is very hard to prove quid pro quo. Yes the Sec of State made a decision favored a company or government and coincidently that company or government gave 10 million to the Clinton foundation. The Clintons are not stupid. They know they can't take bribes directly. But if you give to my charity then there is no conflict. Now, if the Foundation happens to pay the founders a handsome 7 figure salary, but that's just what you pay big executives. The Clintons are like Al Capone. Everyone knew he was a brutal crime boss but he was smart enough to keep from being tied directly to crimes. Everyone knows the Clinton Foundation is front for the Clinton Crime Family but you will never be able to prove criminality.
You don't have to take a salary when you have an unlimited expense account! If the Foundation has 'business' in Hawaii then they can charter a private jet to fly them and some of their guests to Hono and spend a week in a 5 star resort in the presidential suite. Then take a private helicopter to the best golf course in Maui where they pay a few rounds with potential donors. Expensive gifts to woo 'potential' donors with jewelry and $200k Rolex watches. Total expenses for the week $2.5 million. But hey, they aren't taking a salary!
You know what else matters......not hiding behind a foundation and pretending you don't make a lot of money. Fork them.....lying, cheating, conniving, womanizing, fat ankled biatches.......both of them. They did make a lot of money. Just look at their tax returns!!! |
| 2016-08-18 11:23 AM in reply to: ejshowers |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio So you can't show they took a salary sounds like. Then why did you say it! Words matter! Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by Rogillio But the foundation hasn't paid a Clinton a big salary! From their FAQ site: "Do the Clintons receive any income or personal expense reimbursement from the Foundation? No. President Clinton and Chelsea Clinton, who serve on the Board of Directors, do not take a salary from the Clinton Foundation and receive no funding from it. Secretary Clinton did not take a salary when she served on the Board of Directors." Can you show a 7 figure payment to a Clinton? Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I am not much into conspiracy theories, but I see no motivation for the Clinton's to do anything illegal around this. None. Originally posted by ejshowers Originally posted by tuwood I have no idea, but until they are convicted of something criminal or the IRS shows its not a charity foundation, its legit enough for me. Where's that popcorn at when you need it? http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-idUSKCN10T01G Just out of curiosity, do you guys that support Hillary believe the Clinton Foundation is a totally legit charity? As a non-fan of Hillary I feel it's one of the most obvious criminal enterprises that ever existed, but admittedly I'm a little jaded. lol Yet again I'd normally agree with you completely here, but who is responsible for investigating and charging them if they were hypothetically breaking the law.
Motivation? Money! The love of money is the root of all evil. Think about this. You are a company and have XX million allocated to give to charity. You can give to any number of charitable causes from Red Cross to Save the Whales. But rather than give money to them, you give money to the Clinton Foundation and let them decide where your money should go. The very nature of the Clinton Foundation is suspicious. A former US President who is one of the most politically connected and powerful people in the country, and the US Secretary of State who makes decisions every day that influence the world. Pretty much anything you need done in the world, these two can get it done for you. The problem is it is very hard to prove quid pro quo. Yes the Sec of State made a decision favored a company or government and coincidently that company or government gave 10 million to the Clinton foundation. The Clintons are not stupid. They know they can't take bribes directly. But if you give to my charity then there is no conflict. Now, if the Foundation happens to pay the founders a handsome 7 figure salary, but that's just what you pay big executives. The Clintons are like Al Capone. Everyone knew he was a brutal crime boss but he was smart enough to keep from being tied directly to crimes. Everyone knows the Clinton Foundation is front for the Clinton Crime Family but you will never be able to prove criminality.
You don't have to take a salary when you have an unlimited expense account! If the Foundation has 'business' in Hawaii then they can charter a private jet to fly them and some of their guests to Hono and spend a week in a 5 star resort in the presidential suite. Then take a private helicopter to the best golf course in Maui where they pay a few rounds with potential donors. Expensive gifts to woo 'potential' donors with jewelry and $200k Rolex watches. Total expenses for the week $2.5 million. But hey, they aren't taking a salary!
In all honestly, it's set up so that guys like us have no way of tracking any of the money and it's done intentionally. For example, on the Clinton 2015 tax return they donated $1M to a charity called "Clinton Family Foundation" which is a tax exempt charity that's not affiliated with the "Clinton Foundation" that we all know and love. The "Clinton Family Foundation" then donated over $700k to the "Hillary, Bill and Chelsea Clinton Foundation" which God knows what it's for. So even if she took zero perks from the "Clinton Family Foundation" it's a lot more complex than that. Remember this article from a few weeks back: Banks alerted the FBI due to suspicious activity and three separate field offices recommended the DOJ investigate them. Yet, the DOJ declined to do anything. |
| 2016-08-18 7:36 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Champion 10154 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Awesome speech tonight covered live by CNN et al that the media is squirming over. Some calling it a pivot...
Havent seen a Hillary policy speech lately.... |
| 2016-08-19 8:38 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by Rogillio Awesome speech tonight covered live by CNN et al that the media is squirming over. Some calling it a pivot...
Havent seen a Hillary policy speech lately.... haven't seen a Trump policy speech ever.... |
| 2016-08-19 10:23 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Rogillio Awesome speech tonight covered live by CNN et al that the media is squirming over. Some calling it a pivot...
Havent seen a Hillary policy speech lately.... haven't seen a Trump policy speech ever.... lol, you should watch them and then compare them to Hillary.
|
| 2016-08-19 10:25 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by Rogillio Awesome speech tonight covered live by CNN et al that the media is squirming over. Some calling it a pivot...
Havent seen a Hillary policy speech lately.... It's hard to take anything from Dilbert seriously, but Scott Adams has a theory on the pivot that makes some sense.
|
| 2016-08-19 11:44 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Champion 10154 Alabama | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Rogillio Awesome speech tonight covered live by CNN et al that the media is squirming over. Some calling it a pivot...
Havent seen a Hillary policy speech lately.... It's hard to take anything from Dilbert seriously, but Scott Adams has a theory on the pivot that makes some sense.
Good article. Love this: "Trump is smarter than the people who have been publicly calling him an idiot"
|
| 2016-08-19 1:52 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Election 2016 Looks like Trump has to play President today because nobody else will. Trump Plays the Role of President in Louisiana You'd think after Obama spent so much time bagging on Bush's Katrina response he'd at least make a statement or something.
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| 2016 - WTF Pages: 1 2 | ||
| |||
| Election 2014 Pages: 1 2 3 | ||
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK