|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On October 07 2016 03:09 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 07 2016 02:37 Mohdoo wrote: LOL that's awesome, buying ads on the weather channel. "Hurricanes suck ass, huh? Well the GOP has a long history of preventing aid relief for areas suffering from natural disaster" Plus all those Republicans who deny climate change... The weird think is that they continue to think it will work, when he approval ratings are high and congresses are through the floor.
This is what happens when one political party takes a particularly long time to adapt to changes in information transmission and intake.
|
On October 07 2016 03:18 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 03:09 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 07 2016 02:37 Mohdoo wrote: LOL that's awesome, buying ads on the weather channel. "Hurricanes suck ass, huh? Well the GOP has a long history of preventing aid relief for areas suffering from natural disaster" Plus all those Republicans who deny climate change... The weird think is that they continue to think it will work, when he approval ratings are high and congresses are through the floor. This is what happens when one political party takes a particularly long time to adapt to changes in information transmission and intake. Nah, the GOP is well aware of things. Its what happens when you fill your ranks with people who actually drink the koolaid, rather then just peddle it.
|
On October 07 2016 03:18 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 03:09 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 07 2016 02:37 Mohdoo wrote: LOL that's awesome, buying ads on the weather channel. "Hurricanes suck ass, huh? Well the GOP has a long history of preventing aid relief for areas suffering from natural disaster" Plus all those Republicans who deny climate change... The weird think is that they continue to think it will work, when he approval ratings are high and congresses are through the floor. This is what happens when one political party takes a particularly long time to adapt to changes in information transmission and intake. Personally, I think it is that the GOP leadership exist in their own little echo chamber and believe they just need to ride out this Obama thing and get back to whatever it is they do. They cant compromise because a group of hard line conservatives will just try to murder them in the primary for working with the democrats, so leadership is impossible. I truly believe that GOP's master plan if Trump looses is more of the same until 2020 and the census. Maybe if they get crushed in the senate that might change.
|
On October 07 2016 03:09 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 07 2016 02:37 Mohdoo wrote: LOL that's awesome, buying ads on the weather channel. "Hurricanes suck ass, huh? Well the GOP has a long history of preventing aid relief for areas suffering from natural disaster" Plus all those Republicans who deny climate change... Putting them on blast for holding up disaster relief is good. I am glad Clinton is bring it up because they have done is since Obama has been in office. From floods to Zika, they have made a practice of holding up federal to score political points and attempt to blame it on Obama. The weird think is that they continue to think it will work, when he approval ratings are high and congresses are through the floor.
I don't know if the Clinton's want to go there with Haiti in their baggage. I laughed so hard I snorted when Tim Kaine said the Clinton foundation has a higher rating than the red cross.
The Red Cross says it has provided homes to more than 130,000 people. But the actual number of permanent homes the group has built in all of Haiti: six.
|
On October 07 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 03:09 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 07 2016 02:37 Mohdoo wrote: LOL that's awesome, buying ads on the weather channel. "Hurricanes suck ass, huh? Well the GOP has a long history of preventing aid relief for areas suffering from natural disaster" Plus all those Republicans who deny climate change... Putting them on blast for holding up disaster relief is good. I am glad Clinton is bring it up because they have done is since Obama has been in office. From floods to Zika, they have made a practice of holding up federal to score political points and attempt to blame it on Obama. The weird think is that they continue to think it will work, when he approval ratings are high and congresses are through the floor. I don't know if the Clinton's want to go there with Haiti in their baggage. I laughed so hard I snorted when Tim Kaine said the Clinton foundation has a higher rating than the red cross. Show nested quote +The Red Cross says it has provided homes to more than 130,000 people. But the actual number of permanent homes the group has built in all of Haiti: six.
Are you going to substantiate your claims that the Clinton Foundation is an ineffective charity?
|
On October 07 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 03:09 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 07 2016 02:37 Mohdoo wrote: LOL that's awesome, buying ads on the weather channel. "Hurricanes suck ass, huh? Well the GOP has a long history of preventing aid relief for areas suffering from natural disaster" Plus all those Republicans who deny climate change... Putting them on blast for holding up disaster relief is good. I am glad Clinton is bring it up because they have done is since Obama has been in office. From floods to Zika, they have made a practice of holding up federal to score political points and attempt to blame it on Obama. The weird think is that they continue to think it will work, when he approval ratings are high and congresses are through the floor. I don't know if the Clinton's want to go there with Haiti in their baggage. I laughed so hard I snorted when Tim Kaine said the Clinton foundation has a higher rating than the red cross. Show nested quote +The Red Cross says it has provided homes to more than 130,000 people. But the actual number of permanent homes the group has built in all of Haiti: six.
Most people have a barely-surface understanding of everything. The red cross likely has very high approval ratings in our country. I think it's a great idea. The red cross sucks ass, but most voters are shamefully ignorant.
|
On October 07 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 03:09 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 07 2016 02:37 Mohdoo wrote: LOL that's awesome, buying ads on the weather channel. "Hurricanes suck ass, huh? Well the GOP has a long history of preventing aid relief for areas suffering from natural disaster" Plus all those Republicans who deny climate change... Putting them on blast for holding up disaster relief is good. I am glad Clinton is bring it up because they have done is since Obama has been in office. From floods to Zika, they have made a practice of holding up federal to score political points and attempt to blame it on Obama. The weird think is that they continue to think it will work, when he approval ratings are high and congresses are through the floor. I don't know if the Clinton's want to go there with Haiti in their baggage. I laughed so hard I snorted when Tim Kaine said the Clinton foundation has a higher rating than the red cross. Show nested quote +The Red Cross says it has provided homes to more than 130,000 people. But the actual number of permanent homes the group has built in all of Haiti: six. Your posts have become completely banal. You have one topic and it’s so played out it isn’t even worth engaging .
|
On October 07 2016 04:05 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 03:09 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 07 2016 02:37 Mohdoo wrote: LOL that's awesome, buying ads on the weather channel. "Hurricanes suck ass, huh? Well the GOP has a long history of preventing aid relief for areas suffering from natural disaster" Plus all those Republicans who deny climate change... Putting them on blast for holding up disaster relief is good. I am glad Clinton is bring it up because they have done is since Obama has been in office. From floods to Zika, they have made a practice of holding up federal to score political points and attempt to blame it on Obama. The weird think is that they continue to think it will work, when he approval ratings are high and congresses are through the floor. I don't know if the Clinton's want to go there with Haiti in their baggage. I laughed so hard I snorted when Tim Kaine said the Clinton foundation has a higher rating than the red cross. The Red Cross says it has provided homes to more than 130,000 people. But the actual number of permanent homes the group has built in all of Haiti: six. Are you going to substantiate your claims that the Clinton Foundation is an ineffective charity?
I don't know if "ineffective" is the particular word I would use, but here's one example.
In 2011, the Clinton Foundation brokered a deal with Digicel, a cell-phone-service provider seeking to gain access to the Haitian market. The Clintons arranged to have Digicel receive millions in U.S. taxpayer money to provide mobile phones. The USAID Food for Peace program, which the State Department administered through Hillary aide Cheryl Mills, distributed Digicel phones free to Haitians. Digicel didn’t just make money off the U.S. taxpayer; it also made money off the Haitians. When Haitians used the phones, either to make calls or transfer money, they paid Digicel for the service. Haitians using Digicel’s phones also became automatically enrolled in Digicel’s mobile program. By 2012, Digicel had taken over three-quarters of the cell-phone market in Haiti. Digicel is owned by Denis O’Brien, a close friend of the Clintons. O’Brien secured three speaking engagements in his native Ireland that paid $200,000 apiece. These engagements occurred right at the time that Digicel was making its deal with the U.S. State Department. O’Brien has also donated lavishly to the Clinton Foundation, giving between $1 million and $5 million sometime in 2010–2011.
source
Here's another one:
some Clinton-backed projects didn’t come through, such as a $2 million housing expo for thousands of new housing units. The Government Accountability Office found poor planning and unsustainable outcomes for taxpayer-funded projects through USAID, such as a $170 million power plant and port for the Caracol Industrial Park, which the Clinton Foundation promoted.
Hillary Clinton’s younger brother had connections to a mining project in Haiti, raising suspicions among Haitians about the Clintons’ motives. Luxury hotel projects paid by the Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund promised construction jobs — but for Haitians, it represented another disconnect between Clinton-backed efforts and the realities of one of the poorest countries struggling to rebuild after one of the worst humanitarian disasters in the Western Hemisphere.
source
|
Every charity screws up occasionally, the Clinton Foundation seems to be rated rather highly by transparency organisations. I don't really see what the point of this anecdotal stuff is
|
On October 07 2016 04:26 Nyxisto wrote: Every charity screws up occasionally, the Clinton Foundation seems to be rated rather highly by transparency organisations. I don't really see what the point of this anecdotal stuff is I was saying they probably don't want to bring up disaster relief since the people of Haiti have a very different opinion of the Clinton Foundation than the spin they give us here.
The hotel, cell phones, and power plant don't look like mistakes at all either. Looks like they quite intentionally used their positions to secure profits for friends.
|
On October 07 2016 04:28 GreenHorizons wrote: I was saying they probably don't want to bring up disaster relief since the people of Haiti have a very different opinion of the Clinton Foundation than the spin they give us here. There's a very different level of obligation for disaster relief between a charity and the government. I would criticize the government far more for holding up disaster relief than I would a charity. Even if the Clinton Foundation has a spotty record in that regard, Republicans in Congress holding up the government's ability to do so is far worse in my mind.
|
On October 07 2016 04:28 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 04:26 Nyxisto wrote: Every charity screws up occasionally, the Clinton Foundation seems to be rated rather highly by transparency organisations. I don't really see what the point of this anecdotal stuff is I was saying they probably don't want to bring up disaster relief since the people of Haiti have a very different opinion of the Clinton Foundation than the spin they give us here. So you are trying to turn a discussion about the GOP controlled house and senates obstruction of disaster relief funds to the US to an attack on Clinton because of a failed charity effort? As if they are somehow similar?
|
On October 07 2016 04:31 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 04:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 04:26 Nyxisto wrote: Every charity screws up occasionally, the Clinton Foundation seems to be rated rather highly by transparency organisations. I don't really see what the point of this anecdotal stuff is I was saying they probably don't want to bring up disaster relief since the people of Haiti have a very different opinion of the Clinton Foundation than the spin they give us here. So you are trying to turn a discussion about the GOP controlled house and senates obstruction of disaster relief funds to the US to an attack on Clinton because of a failed charity effort? As if they are somehow similar?
I'm saying that the Clinton's have a history of turning disasters into business opportunities at the expense of the victims of said disaster. So while Republicans are stingy, the Clintons have sticky fingers.
|
On October 07 2016 04:34 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 04:31 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 04:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 04:26 Nyxisto wrote: Every charity screws up occasionally, the Clinton Foundation seems to be rated rather highly by transparency organisations. I don't really see what the point of this anecdotal stuff is I was saying they probably don't want to bring up disaster relief since the people of Haiti have a very different opinion of the Clinton Foundation than the spin they give us here. So you are trying to turn a discussion about the GOP controlled house and senates obstruction of disaster relief funds to the US to an attack on Clinton because of a failed charity effort? As if they are somehow similar? I'm saying that the Clinton's have a history of turning disasters into business opportunities at the expense of the victims of said disaster. So while Republicans are stingy, the Clintons have sticky fingers. Although that is true and people who work with Clinton seem to manage to make money, the two acts are not equivalent like you are attempting to make them out to be.
|
On October 07 2016 04:41 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 04:34 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 04:31 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 04:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 04:26 Nyxisto wrote: Every charity screws up occasionally, the Clinton Foundation seems to be rated rather highly by transparency organisations. I don't really see what the point of this anecdotal stuff is I was saying they probably don't want to bring up disaster relief since the people of Haiti have a very different opinion of the Clinton Foundation than the spin they give us here. So you are trying to turn a discussion about the GOP controlled house and senates obstruction of disaster relief funds to the US to an attack on Clinton because of a failed charity effort? As if they are somehow similar? I'm saying that the Clinton's have a history of turning disasters into business opportunities at the expense of the victims of said disaster. So while Republicans are stingy, the Clintons have sticky fingers. Although that is true and people who work with Clinton seem to manage to make money, the two acts are not equivalent like you are attempting to make them out to be.
I didn't intend to make them equivalent I was pointing out it's not a good topic for the Clintons. At least you're not trying to deny them taking advantage of disaster victims.
|
On October 07 2016 04:16 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 04:05 ticklishmusic wrote:On October 07 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 03:09 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 07 2016 02:37 Mohdoo wrote: LOL that's awesome, buying ads on the weather channel. "Hurricanes suck ass, huh? Well the GOP has a long history of preventing aid relief for areas suffering from natural disaster" Plus all those Republicans who deny climate change... Putting them on blast for holding up disaster relief is good. I am glad Clinton is bring it up because they have done is since Obama has been in office. From floods to Zika, they have made a practice of holding up federal to score political points and attempt to blame it on Obama. The weird think is that they continue to think it will work, when he approval ratings are high and congresses are through the floor. I don't know if the Clinton's want to go there with Haiti in their baggage. I laughed so hard I snorted when Tim Kaine said the Clinton foundation has a higher rating than the red cross. The Red Cross says it has provided homes to more than 130,000 people. But the actual number of permanent homes the group has built in all of Haiti: six. Are you going to substantiate your claims that the Clinton Foundation is an ineffective charity? I don't know if "ineffective" is the particular word I would use, but here's one example. Show nested quote +In 2011, the Clinton Foundation brokered a deal with Digicel, a cell-phone-service provider seeking to gain access to the Haitian market. The Clintons arranged to have Digicel receive millions in U.S. taxpayer money to provide mobile phones. The USAID Food for Peace program, which the State Department administered through Hillary aide Cheryl Mills, distributed Digicel phones free to Haitians. Digicel didn’t just make money off the U.S. taxpayer; it also made money off the Haitians. When Haitians used the phones, either to make calls or transfer money, they paid Digicel for the service. Haitians using Digicel’s phones also became automatically enrolled in Digicel’s mobile program. By 2012, Digicel had taken over three-quarters of the cell-phone market in Haiti. Digicel is owned by Denis O’Brien, a close friend of the Clintons. O’Brien secured three speaking engagements in his native Ireland that paid $200,000 apiece. These engagements occurred right at the time that Digicel was making its deal with the U.S. State Department. O’Brien has also donated lavishly to the Clinton Foundation, giving between $1 million and $5 million sometime in 2010–2011. sourceHere's another one: Show nested quote +some Clinton-backed projects didn’t come through, such as a $2 million housing expo for thousands of new housing units. The Government Accountability Office found poor planning and unsustainable outcomes for taxpayer-funded projects through USAID, such as a $170 million power plant and port for the Caracol Industrial Park, which the Clinton Foundation promoted.
Hillary Clinton’s younger brother had connections to a mining project in Haiti, raising suspicions among Haitians about the Clintons’ motives. Luxury hotel projects paid by the Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund promised construction jobs — but for Haitians, it represented another disconnect between Clinton-backed efforts and the realities of one of the poorest countries struggling to rebuild after one of the worst humanitarian disasters in the Western Hemisphere. source
I didn't know of those double dealings concerning Haiti, although I did know the aid to Haiti has generally been a disaster. However, Haiti itself is very problematic. As most poor states, it is plagued with corruption and cronyism. I'm not sure a National Review article is a good source for showing the Clintons were directly involved, but in particular the involvement of her brother seems like a conflict of interest. Here is a fairer article on the matter: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/03/15/us/politics/hillary-clinton-haiti.html
|
On October 07 2016 04:45 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 04:16 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 04:05 ticklishmusic wrote:On October 07 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 03:09 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 07 2016 02:37 Mohdoo wrote: LOL that's awesome, buying ads on the weather channel. "Hurricanes suck ass, huh? Well the GOP has a long history of preventing aid relief for areas suffering from natural disaster" Plus all those Republicans who deny climate change... Putting them on blast for holding up disaster relief is good. I am glad Clinton is bring it up because they have done is since Obama has been in office. From floods to Zika, they have made a practice of holding up federal to score political points and attempt to blame it on Obama. The weird think is that they continue to think it will work, when he approval ratings are high and congresses are through the floor. I don't know if the Clinton's want to go there with Haiti in their baggage. I laughed so hard I snorted when Tim Kaine said the Clinton foundation has a higher rating than the red cross. The Red Cross says it has provided homes to more than 130,000 people. But the actual number of permanent homes the group has built in all of Haiti: six. Are you going to substantiate your claims that the Clinton Foundation is an ineffective charity? I don't know if "ineffective" is the particular word I would use, but here's one example. In 2011, the Clinton Foundation brokered a deal with Digicel, a cell-phone-service provider seeking to gain access to the Haitian market. The Clintons arranged to have Digicel receive millions in U.S. taxpayer money to provide mobile phones. The USAID Food for Peace program, which the State Department administered through Hillary aide Cheryl Mills, distributed Digicel phones free to Haitians. Digicel didn’t just make money off the U.S. taxpayer; it also made money off the Haitians. When Haitians used the phones, either to make calls or transfer money, they paid Digicel for the service. Haitians using Digicel’s phones also became automatically enrolled in Digicel’s mobile program. By 2012, Digicel had taken over three-quarters of the cell-phone market in Haiti. Digicel is owned by Denis O’Brien, a close friend of the Clintons. O’Brien secured three speaking engagements in his native Ireland that paid $200,000 apiece. These engagements occurred right at the time that Digicel was making its deal with the U.S. State Department. O’Brien has also donated lavishly to the Clinton Foundation, giving between $1 million and $5 million sometime in 2010–2011. sourceHere's another one: some Clinton-backed projects didn’t come through, such as a $2 million housing expo for thousands of new housing units. The Government Accountability Office found poor planning and unsustainable outcomes for taxpayer-funded projects through USAID, such as a $170 million power plant and port for the Caracol Industrial Park, which the Clinton Foundation promoted.
Hillary Clinton’s younger brother had connections to a mining project in Haiti, raising suspicions among Haitians about the Clintons’ motives. Luxury hotel projects paid by the Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund promised construction jobs — but for Haitians, it represented another disconnect between Clinton-backed efforts and the realities of one of the poorest countries struggling to rebuild after one of the worst humanitarian disasters in the Western Hemisphere. source I didn't know of those double dealings concerning Haiti, although I did know the aid to Haiti has generally been a disaster. However, Haiti itself is very problematic. As most poor states, it is plagued with corruption and cronyism. I'm not sure a National Review article is a good source for showing the Clintons were directly involved, but in particular the involvement of her brother seems like a conflict of interest. Here is a fairer article on the matter: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/03/15/us/politics/hillary-clinton-haiti.html
Something of particular note in that article you posted.
An estimated 150,000 Haitian-American voters live in Florida, the state where 537 votes decided the 2000 election.
|
Defense Secretary Ash Carter's former senior military aid used his government-issued credit card at the “Candy Bar” club in the “Hooker Hill” area of Seoul, South Korea, and the "Cica Cica Boom" club in Rome, among other damning offenses, according to a salacious new report from the Pentagon's inspector general.
Army Maj. Gen. Ronald Lewis — who served as Carter's special assistant and then as senior military assistant — misused his government travel charge card for personal expenses, lied about the misuse and "engaged in conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman on multiple occasions, which included patronizing an establishment off-limits to U.S. military personnel, drinking to excess in public, and improper interactions with females," the Defense Department Inspector General charges in an investigation released on Thursday.
The IG report substantiates three allegations Carter's office made against Lewis. The incidents all took place in 2015 while Lewis traveled with Carter on official business.
In April 2015, the report says, Lewis visited the Candy Bar, an off-limits establishment in an area of Seoul locally known as “Hooker Hill.”
Lewis charged roughly $1,121 to his government card at the club, including an 81 percent tip. When asked in a DoD IG interview why he used his government card, he said, “I don't know in this particular case.”
While traveling with Carter to Rome several months later in October, Lewis stopped by the Cica Cica Boom club, an establishment advertising “Sexy Show,” “Fans Club” and “Lap Dance.”
"After dancing with local women and drinking to 'more than moderation' for three hours," he tried and failed to swipe his personal debit card to pay for the $1,755.98 racked up at the club.
Unable to pay the steep tab, Lewis returned to the Defense secretary delegation’s hotel at 1:40 a.m., to grab his government card from a subordinate, bringing along a female employee of the club.
"The subordinate’s room was in the same hallway as the Secretary of Defense’s room, and the female club escort waited for MG Lewis in that hallway," according to the report.
Lewis also had numerous "improper interactions with females," on trips with Carter in Hawaii, Malaysia and Palo Alto, Calif.
Source
|
On October 07 2016 04:44 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 04:41 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 04:34 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 04:31 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 04:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 04:26 Nyxisto wrote: Every charity screws up occasionally, the Clinton Foundation seems to be rated rather highly by transparency organisations. I don't really see what the point of this anecdotal stuff is I was saying they probably don't want to bring up disaster relief since the people of Haiti have a very different opinion of the Clinton Foundation than the spin they give us here. So you are trying to turn a discussion about the GOP controlled house and senates obstruction of disaster relief funds to the US to an attack on Clinton because of a failed charity effort? As if they are somehow similar? I'm saying that the Clinton's have a history of turning disasters into business opportunities at the expense of the victims of said disaster. So while Republicans are stingy, the Clintons have sticky fingers. Although that is true and people who work with Clinton seem to manage to make money, the two acts are not equivalent like you are attempting to make them out to be. I didn't intend to make them equivalent I was pointing out it's not a good topic for the Clintons. At least you're not trying to deny them taking advantage of disaster victims. Whatever makes you happy GH.
|
On October 07 2016 04:52 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2016 04:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 04:41 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 04:34 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 04:31 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2016 04:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 07 2016 04:26 Nyxisto wrote: Every charity screws up occasionally, the Clinton Foundation seems to be rated rather highly by transparency organisations. I don't really see what the point of this anecdotal stuff is I was saying they probably don't want to bring up disaster relief since the people of Haiti have a very different opinion of the Clinton Foundation than the spin they give us here. So you are trying to turn a discussion about the GOP controlled house and senates obstruction of disaster relief funds to the US to an attack on Clinton because of a failed charity effort? As if they are somehow similar? I'm saying that the Clinton's have a history of turning disasters into business opportunities at the expense of the victims of said disaster. So while Republicans are stingy, the Clintons have sticky fingers. Although that is true and people who work with Clinton seem to manage to make money, the two acts are not equivalent like you are attempting to make them out to be. I didn't intend to make them equivalent I was pointing out it's not a good topic for the Clintons. At least you're not trying to deny them taking advantage of disaster victims. Whatever makes you happy GH.
You're welcome. My pleasure.
|
|
|
|