The Hill: Half of Clinton's nongovernment meetings at State were with donors: AP

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by yaxomoxay, Aug 23, 2016.

  1. yaxomoxay macrumors 68020

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #1
    More than half of the meetings that Hillary Clinton reportedly took with people outside the government while serving as secretary of State were with Clinton Foundation donors, according to The Associated Press.

    At least 85 of those 154 people, whom met or had phone conversations with Clinton, had donated to Clinton's family foundation, either directly or through companies or groups, according to news service's review published Tuesday.

    They donated to the Clinton Foundation or pledged money to the global charity's international programs, the AP reported, citing State Department calendars that have been released so far.

    The 85 donors contributed $156 million to the charity, with at least 40 donating more than $100,000 each and 20 giving more than $1 million, according to the review.

    The AP said that the meetings apparently didn't violate legal agreements that Clinton and former President Bill Clinton signed before she served in the Obama administration starting in 2009.

    Officials from at least 16 foreign governments that donated upward of $170 million to the Clinton Foundation also met with Clinton, though the AP noted they presumably met on state business.

    The foundation has faced a new round of scrutiny recently as Clinton leads Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump in polls.

    The Clinton Foundation announced last week that it would no longer accept foreign or corporate donations if Clinton becomes president, though Trump has called for the Clintons to shutter it immediately.

    "It is now clear that the Clinton Foundation is the most corrupt enterprise in political history," Trump said Monday.

    Bill Clinton defended the charity's work on Monday and announced that he would step down from the foundation he established in 1997 if his wife is elected in November. He also said the group would only accept money from U.S. citizens, permanent residents and U.S.-based independent foundations.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...-non-governmental-meetings-at-state-were-with
     
  2. Huntn macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #2
    "It is now clear that the Clinton Foundation is the most corrupt enterprise in political history," Trump said Monday

    Clarification : It's clearly documented that Mr. Trust is a lieing sack.

    The Clinton Foundation is a respected charity. The attack campaign is emblimatic of conservative corruption that's running rampant and you've become their local mouth piece. There is no documentation of wrongdoing, just accusations, innuendo, and slander.

    See The Republican Agenda post 2163.
     
  3. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #3
    I'd really like it Conservatives actually gave us a list of things that can't be done by anybody running for President. Not things that are like, crimes, but things that somehow disqualify only Democrats.

    Sending e-mails. Meeting with people. Having your aides send e-mails. Starting a charity. Going to Church. Playing golf. Playing basketball. Going on vacation. Going out to dinner. Giving speeches. Seeing a doctor. Talking on the telephone. Not wearing the right pin on your lapel. Oh, and actually earning the respect of real journalists, as opposed to Fox News clowns.

    I'm sure I missed quite a few.
     
  4. smallcoffee macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Location:
    North America
    #4
    Hey want to talk to the Secretary of State? Sure go ahead and donate $100,000 to her foundation.

    Lol do they call this pay for play or is there a better term for it?
     
  5. Herdfan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    #5
    I think there is a large subset of people that just don't care what she has done.
     
  6. zin Suspended

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #6
    I posted this thread already. I forgive you, this time only. ;)
     
  7. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #7


    You might have a better argument if it could be shown that Secretary Clinton actually did agree to a meeting with Peabody.

    This is how corruption works:

    Say that Bill is a police officer. He also runs charity associated with his department to buy needy kids Christmas presents. And I make a point of writing his charity a check for $100 every year.

    Bill the cop pulls me over for speeding. If I say "Bill, you know I'm a good guy - let me off with a warning"; that doesn't prove Bill is corrupt. You would have to analyze all the tickets, and non-tickets, Bill wrote. Bill probably lets some donors off, and he also let some non-donors off. If he regularly let donors off significantly more frequently than non-donors - then you might, arguably have a case he was guilty of corruption. But probably not one that would earn a conviction in court.

    Now, if I offer Bill a hundred dollars cash to let me off with a warning, then I've attempted to bribe a police officer. But it only becomes police corruption if Bill accepts that offer.

    Is everyone who donates to their local Police Department charity corrupt? Is every police officer associated with those charities corrupt? Why do so many people drive around with little stickers on their back windows that indicate they gave to their local PD charity?

    Are all those people corrupt?
     
  8. zin Suspended

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #8
    Do you think it's just a coincidence that at least half of her non-government meetings took place with people who are large Clinton Foundation donors? This is tremendously disproportionate. Do you think it's strange that meetings with a U.S. Government employee are being coordinated by senior directors of the Clinton Foundation? Why were large Clinton Foundation donors seemingly getting fast-track access to the Secretary of State? These people are getting preferential access to the Secretary of State because they are large Clinton Foundation donors. Even a moron can see this.

    Fact of the matter is that Hillary Clinton said Clinton Foundation and State Department business were completely separate. This is simply not true. She lied, yet again.

    But what do I know? I'm sure those three FBI field offices that wanted to investigate didn't suspect a thing either.
     
  9. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #9
    Now Hillary is blaming Colin Powell for her email server brouhaha. General Powell is like, "Huh? She said what? Hell no!!!"

    Too funny.
     
  10. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #10
    Yes because all the big players gave donations to the Clinton Foundation.
     
  11. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #12
    Perhaps I'm missing something - but if one makes a big contribution and wants to meet someone - that itself isn't any indication of anything nefarious. So unless there's hard evidence - anything to make this more is just snipe hunting.
     
  12. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #13


    Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State for four years. Suggesting she talked on the phone or met with Clinton Foundation donors, on average, a little more than two times per month.

    Again, I need to explain how corruption works. You would need to show that Hillary Clinton actually did something for Foundation donors that she would not normally have done. And no - taking a meeting or having a phone call doesn't count. It's not corruption if you give a friend of your family a job interview at your company. It only becomes corruption if you give a clearly unqualified person a job, just because of your personal connections.
     
  13. smallcoffee macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Location:
    North America
    #14
    That's not a good analogy. A better one would be you asking Bill to come patrol your neighborhood more, or have some other officers do so. Or perhaps arrange a meeting with the station chief.

    At this point it's an open secret. A serious federal investigation would probably uncover wrongdoing and special benefits. I can't for the life of me figure out how people can just sit here and deny that there's anything going on despite all the hints.

    These look interesting

    Probably just the tip of the iceberg.
     
  14. zin Suspended

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #15
    Isn't that the point I'm making? Give $156 million in return for favours.

    If nothing at all is happening here, then what is the purpose of the Clinton Foundation coordinating these meetings? Why are these donors going to the management of the Clinton Foundation, who in return forward requests to the State Department? Why not just contact the State Department directly?
     
  15. 1458279 Suspended

    1458279

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Location:
    California
    #16
    But when Hillary does it, that means that it's not illegal.
     
  16. Limey77 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2010
    #17
    No, she's just saying that when asked by other former Secretaries of State what the single most important piece of advice he would give Hillary, that he said to use a private email server. As witnessed by both Madeleine Allbright and Condeleeza Rice.

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/1...advise-hillary-use-private-email-492376?rm=eu
     
  17. Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #18
    "...Estee Lauder executives who were listed as meeting with Clinton while her department worked with the firm's corporate charity to counter gender-based violence in South Africa."​

    Well, damned if that isn't the smokingest of smoking guns. We certainly wouldn't want the State Dept. to have anything to do with that. They simply must recuse, because reasons...

    ...Also, too, the CF is a ***** non-profit charity. It doesn't line the Clinton's pockets. They donate to the charity, not the other way around.
     
  18. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #19
    Powell denies it categorically. I'd believe Colin Powell before Hillary Clinton.
     
  19. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #20
    Clinton likely only spoke directly to rich people. And if she got $2 billion in foundation donations rich people obviously liked it. And rich people who wanted to talk to Clinton would have likely wanted to donate to a charity that's important to Clinton.

    It would be corrupt if she spoke to someone because they'd donated - or if she said they needed to donate before she'd look at it.
     
  20. smallcoffee macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Location:
    North America
    #21
    They have a vested interest in seeing the foundation succeed. It's about legacy, not money.
     
  21. 1458279, Aug 23, 2016
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2016

    1458279 Suspended

    1458279

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Location:
    California
    #22
    The real problem is that we'll never have "hard evidence" unless someone actually comes out and says "yes I paid for that" and even then, the other side could say "that wasn't our understanding" ... It's really a perfect crime. That's the problem.

    Bill pardoned admitted, convected terrorist and Hillary got some 100% of the vote in the area they came from:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_pardon_controversy

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/05/bill_hillary_and_the_faln.html


    Now, why did Bill pardon them? Last time it took an act of congress to get a Clinton to tell the truth.

    At this point, it really doesn't make a difference.
     
  22. Limey77 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2010
    #23
    So despite two other Secretaries of State refusing to back his claim AND there being an email from him recommending it, you still refuse to accept it.
     
  23. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #24
    Could still be corrupt - http://www.fcpablog.com/blog/2016/2...cognize-the-warning-signs-and-mitigate-t.html
    --- Post Merged, Aug 23, 2016 ---
    Source?
     
  24. Huntn macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #25
    After 30 years of empty allegations, the villagers are no longer paying attentive to the boy crying wolf.
     

Share This Page