Hillary Clinton 2016 Presidential Thread |
||
|
Hillary Clinton 2016 Presidential Thread
Bahamut.Ravael said: » The "favors" could simply be access in some cases, or perhaps something more. Now are you going keep on deflecting by playing semantics or are you going to answer the questions? It is funny seeing you call people out for being partisan hacks while you prance around as one yourself... I've said before that I don't anyone of her status is squeaky clean so no I wouldn't dismiss anything outright. But these Hillary "scandals" have yet to produce anything of substance. At some point, you have to consider that maybe there's nothing attached to this particular thread and continually yanking on it just shows your exceptional bias.
eliroo said: » Cerberus.Pleebo said: » So more speculation. No one cares about your loaded questions. There's either evidence of corruption or there isn't. If/when there is, that's actually news and not this "could" "perhaps" ***. So you dismiss every theory that isn't proven when it is spoken? I mean I could say that you and Rav 69 each other in the back of a dirty vast station bathroom double glory hole and solely base it on the fact that you seem to be agreeing on something right now... It most likely has no basis in truth and I have no proof but hey I mean it's possible right? Better to be live it happened and be proven wrong later than not believe in it now and be proven wrong later right? Man I'd look stupid then... Slandering someone for the sake of the possibility that they might be guilty of something is let the best idea even if there is a possibility... Sadly most of us are guilty of that because we'd like to get the competition out of the way no matter what we're talking about... In the end you'll just see Dems slapping trump around and pubs defending him while dems laugh and try to point out hypocrisy as pubs will be slapping Hillary around with Dems defending her and pubs laugh and try to point out the hypocrisy... It's a beautiful and entertaining cycle that we repeat every day... Cerberus.Pleebo said: » So more speculation. No one cares about your loaded questions. There's either evidence of corruption or there isn't. If/when there is, that's actually news and not this "could" "perhaps" ***. Okay, so we can continue to speculate day and night about what Trump really means by his comments, but speculating about whether or not Clinton is putting a giant "For Sale" sign on government office without absolute proof is something that we can't even talk about, even when there's a strong sense of impropriety. Makes sense. Lakshmi.Flavin said: » It is funny seeing you call people out for being partisan hacks while you prance around as one yourself... Is that the best you've got? Please, keep going. The Trump diversion. Whatever.
Any proof would be a start. Scant details about cherrypicked meetings doesn't qualify. Like, there are two sides to the argument and both sides have an opinion on what is going on. Neither side KNOWS what is going on but both claim they do. Both sides claim second-hand opinion as fact despite not necessarily having any solid proof.
It's like a solution consisting of ***, cluelessness, belligerence, pointlessness, and a mixture of cocaine and gunpowder, commonly known as brown-brown and used to raise aggression. If we could bottle this, atomize it, and release it into the air above ISIS controlled areas, we'd have them beaten in a weekend. I should run for president. Bahamut.Ravael said: » Why in the world would all of these groups be donating to the Clinton Foundation? Why in the world would they be spending millions of dollars to the charity foundation of American politicians, especially when some of them are considered third world countries? Assuming that "there's nothing to see here" is illogical nonsense. Yea screw donating to charity! And a President setting up a foundation when they leave office? No way! Obama foundation? Not gonna happen! Shiva.Viciousss said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » Why in the world would all of these groups be donating to the Clinton Foundation? Why in the world would they be spending millions of dollars to the charity foundation of American politicians, especially when some of them are considered third world countries? Assuming that "there's nothing to see here" is illogical nonsense. Yea screw donating to charity! And a President setting up a foundation when they leave office? No way! Obama foundation? Not gonna happen!  Conspiracy theories dont count as points. Keep believing in your special favors story tho.
Shiva.Viciousss said: » Conspiracy theories dont count as points. Keep believing in your special favors story tho. You guys are getting ridiculous. I look at Saudi Arabia donating over 10 million dollars to the Clinton Foundation, and I'm crazy for thinking that they did it for political reasons. In this case I'd rather be called a conspiracy theorist than be one of the utterly naïve fools who thinks it was pure charity.
[+]
Shiva.Viciousss said: » Conspiracy theories dont count as points. Keep believing in your special favors story tho. Not sure if you know what conspiracy theories are. He isn't saying that the US is poisoning us with fluoride.
[+]
eliroo said: » Shiva.Viciousss said: » Conspiracy theories dont count as points. Keep believing in your special favors story tho. Not sure if you know what conspiracy theories are. He isn't saying that the US is poisoning us with fluoride. Or anything Alex Jones may say. Both are about the same in terms of thinking.
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael said: » Shiva.Viciousss said: » Conspiracy theories dont count as points. Keep believing in your special favors story tho. You guys are getting ridiculous. I look at Saudi Arabia donating over 10 million dollars to the Clinton Foundation, and I'm crazy for thinking that they did it for political reasons. In this case I'd rather be called a conspiracy theorist than be one of the utterly naïve fools who thinks it was pure charity. Saudi Arabia donated around 10m to the Clinton Foundation to help build the Clinton library, whats the problem? They also donated the same amount for the first Bush library. Is that a problem? You might want to choose a different example, especially since 10m is pretty much nothing to those Saudi billionaires. I don't know when donating to charity became such a bad thing. Shiva.Viciousss said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » Shiva.Viciousss said: » Conspiracy theories dont count as points. Keep believing in your special favors story tho. You guys are getting ridiculous. I look at Saudi Arabia donating over 10 million dollars to the Clinton Foundation, and I'm crazy for thinking that they did it for political reasons. In this case I'd rather be called a conspiracy theorist than be one of the utterly naïve fools who thinks it was pure charity. Saudi Arabia donated around 10m to the Clinton Foundation to help build the Clinton library, whats the problem? They also donated the same amount for the first Bush library. Is that a problem? You might want to choose a different example, especially since 10m is pretty much nothing to those Saudi billionaires. I don't know when donating to charity became such a bad thing. Does it matter what they donated for or to whom? Even if it were for libraries, does doesn't prove that they didn't do it for political reasons. Now that you're doing research, explain away all the other millions of dollars that the Foundation has received from the Middle East and beyond.
[+]
Is the Middle East somehow incapable of philanthropy?
Bill Clinton has traveled all over the world raising money for his charity and...thats it. No explanation needed.
Shiva.Viciousss said: » Bill Clinton has traveled all over the world raising money for his charity and...thats it. No explanation needed. Bahamut.Ravael said: » Shiva.Viciousss said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » Shiva.Viciousss said: » Conspiracy theories dont count as points. Keep believing in your special favors story tho. You guys are getting ridiculous. I look at Saudi Arabia donating over 10 million dollars to the Clinton Foundation, and I'm crazy for thinking that they did it for political reasons. In this case I'd rather be called a conspiracy theorist than be one of the utterly naïve fools who thinks it was pure charity. Saudi Arabia donated around 10m to the Clinton Foundation to help build the Clinton library, whats the problem? They also donated the same amount for the first Bush library. Is that a problem? You might want to choose a different example, especially since 10m is pretty much nothing to those Saudi billionaires. I don't know when donating to charity became such a bad thing. Does it matter what they donated for or to whom? Even if it were for libraries, does doesn't prove that they didn't do it for political reasons. Now that you're doing research, explain away all the other millions of dollars that the Foundation has received from the Middle East and beyond. You know, ethical rules and regulations broke and all. *grabs some popcorn, there's going to be some fancy spinning going on here* No spin necessary. There haven't been examples of "special treatment" provided. No one even knows what special treatment means.
Cerberus.Pleebo said: » No spin necessary. There haven't been examples of "special treatment" provided. No one even knows what special treatment means. Go meet with John Kerry, and tell us how that visit went. I'm sure you, as somebody who doesn't donate to any charities, can walk right up and get a meeting with the Secretary of State of the United States right away, like these donors to the Clinton Foundation did. And while you are there, why not ask for something. I'm sure Kerry is more than willing to listen to you after you make that $25 million donation to the charity of his choosing that his family members also happen to run. How do you know they got n right away? Or are you just making that up?
[+]
That's a hypothetical, not an example.
Shiva.Viciousss said: » How do you know they got n right away? Or are you just making that up? Or are you going to pass that off as coincidence? Or even, as Denier #2 stated, a hypothetical? Maybe people should look more into when those donations were made and when those meetings occurred. Notice that AP didn't even report that? I'm sure, if any of their idiots had any brains in them, they would have investigated that, and if she was truly "innocent" as you declared her to be, they would have reported that right way, first paragraph, if not first sentence.
[+]
Well so far it looks like a tempest in a teapot.
The newest Hillary Clinton e-mails show the banality of favor seekers seeking favors Quartz TLDR: What they got for their contributions was being able to hear Abedin say "We will work on that" or "I'll get back to you on that." or “We have reached out thru official channels” Ending paragraphs: Quote: ... The biggest conflict of interest cited in the AP story is Secretary Clinton’s extensive help for Mohammed Yunus, the Nobel prize-winning economist who was embroiled in a conflict with the government of Bangladesh over his development bank. There’s no doubt that the Clinton Foundation’s fundraising strategy is designed to leverage the Clintons’ influence. It’s a machine to manufacture apparent conflicts of interest, and Abedin’s eventual move to become a joint employee of the Foundation, Band’s consulting group and the State Department can only be described as an error in judgement. So far, this e-mail dump shows a typical parade of powerful individuals seeking to influence political officials, akin to the traffic to any politician’s assistant’s inbox, not a pay-to-play scandal. More e-mails may change that narrative, but so far, the news is that politicians build and maintain extensive social networks, and Hillary Clinton is a politician. You know Chanti, those examples that article highlights but tries to pass them off as non-conflict of interests issues, people have been successfully prosecuted on....
Asura.Kingnobody said: » Shiva.Viciousss said: » How do you know they got n right away? Or are you just making that up? Or are you going to pass that off as coincidence? Or even, as Denier #2 stated, a hypothetical? Maybe people should look more into when those donations were made and when those meetings occurred. Notice that AP didn't even report that? I'm sure, if any of their idiots had any brains in them, they would have investigated that, and if she was truly "innocent" as you declared her to be, they would have reported that right way, first paragraph, if not first sentence. So you are making it up, which was obvious from the start. There is no evidence of any wrongdoing. Meeting people is not unethical. Meeting donors is not unethical. Penciling someone into the schedule is not a "special favor." Shiva.Viciousss said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Shiva.Viciousss said: » How do you know they got n right away? Or are you just making that up? Or are you going to pass that off as coincidence? Or even, as Denier #2 stated, a hypothetical? Maybe people should look more into when those donations were made and when those meetings occurred. Notice that AP didn't even report that? I'm sure, if any of their idiots had any brains in them, they would have investigated that, and if she was truly "innocent" as you declared her to be, they would have reported that right way, first paragraph, if not first sentence. So you are making it up, which was obvious from the start. There is no evidence of any wrongdoing. Meeting people is not unethical. Meeting donors is not unethical. Penciling someone into the schedule is not a "special favor." I mean, you are denying this so hard, I'm surprised you haven't been offered into her cabinet yet. But seriously, you don't even see that she, at the very least, the 4 ethics regulations on government employees were broken? Are you so far stuck in the sand that you can literally see the other side of the world now? |
||
|
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|
||
