General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Clintons STILL aren't corrupt...
Excellent article that uses facts to make the case.....
"Now, 2008, you will recall, was when Hillary Clinton was running for president. It would stand to reason, would it not, that if Clinton was so intent on advancing Giustras Colombian business interests, she would have been for the trade deal at the exact moment Giustra finished paying her husband $131 million? But she was against it as a candidate, and implacably so! I will do everything I can to urge the Congress to reject the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, she said on the stump in Pennsylvania that April.
Thats not exactly the position of someone shilling for a donor, but I suppose if youre a committed enough Clintonologist, you can turn it all into a conspiracyshe was just opposing it then to throw the rest of us off the scent, but shed support it later when it mattered. In fact, she was so intent on hiding her real position that she even parted ways with campaign manager Mark Penn because he was consulting for the Colombian government in behalf of the deal."
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/04/22/the-clintons-still-aren-t-corrupt.html
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)This is one of the reasons everyone on my block loves them some Bernie.
He comes out, he talks to them about the unfairness of people earning $30 million/year on the backs of people losing their homes and benefits.
And he's been doing it for years.
Just now, he's getting some media coverage and it's lighting up the voters!
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)... are trying to sell though. The outrageous screeds about HRC's position on trade just tells me people have no clue what she has actually voted for, against, and spoken out about.
Autumn
(45,012 posts)NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)This is like a steam locomotive leaving the station.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Some people are STILL trying to find something. And still no luck.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)And also finding nada, because there is nada to be found.
How about using those corruption-finding shovels on GOP ground?
You know, where the opposition party is camped.
Why are we helping them in their never ending quest for hopefully nada until at least the middle of next year, again?
Supporting someone for nomination as the Democratic Party candidate for President other than Clinton is not a good answer for having set foot in the enemy camp and photocopying their 'strategy', such as it is.
Me, I am just happy the word "corruption" is actually on the reluctant lips of the mass media, reluctant because we all know where the real and mass corruption is.....beginning with the media.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... not OK with you?
moondust
(19,966 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Is it pissing you all off yet?
Autumn
(45,012 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)They don't dislike her, and they don't think that she herself is corrupt. But they think her hair looks corrupt. They'll vote for her if she wins the primary though.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)My kid said, "and damn, Bernie needs to learn how to comb his hair before he goes on TV!" Kids say the darnedest things, don't they?
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts).
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)You sincerely made me laugh. Thank you.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)was so full of win, I need to know where to ship your internets.
You've won them today.
uponit7771
(90,323 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Her vote is not for sale.
cali
(114,904 posts)with the appearance of conflict. that is in your face.
Her judgment is so poor, I don't think she has any business near the Oval Office.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)... To be proven wrong, can you?
BreakfastClub
(765 posts)True Blue Door
(2,969 posts)So I wouldn't say Hillary Clinton is corrupt. Her motives, whatever they are, clearly do not involve money as an end in itself or she would have chosen the other Party.
People who choose the Democratic Party but act like she does have complicated motives. Unfortunately, the net result in her case is still despicable.
If it weren't for the Iraq War vote, I would be more willing to listen to her. But that was a boundary moment in American history with razor-sharp moral distinctions, and she couldn't see more than a millimeter in front of her face. And she still acts like that. Nothing has made a dent in that bubble of limitless self-regard and inability to see context.
Hekate
(90,616 posts)Good grief.
True Blue Door
(2,969 posts)Nor vice-versa.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Ever hear of Glass-Steagall?
Phil Gramm, the slow talking tip o' the spear for the repeal of Glass-Steagall hisself. On the payroll is a regular Who's Who of the process, including the guy who signed it into law, William J. Clinton. Now they work together at UBS, of all places, one of the "Too Big to Fail Banks" the US Taxpayer has had the privilege of bailing out, not to mention it isn't even a US bank.
http://financialservicesinc.ubs.com/revitalizingamerica/SenatorPhilGramm.html
Speaker Sam's immoral moral of the story: "When everybody goes along, everybody gets along."
Like Nixon said, it rhymes with "in the book."
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)in FIFTEEN months?
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)There are people that make lots of money that are not corrupt. This idea that because someone makes a lot of money that makes them corrupt and evil is puzzling to me. Money only makes you more of what you already are.
We'll just ignore the $100 million Bill's made by peddling access and influence over the last 15 years. Nothing to see, folks.
Hekate
(90,616 posts)MFrohike
(1,980 posts)I'm talking about their personal wealth, which is valued at over $100 million. Bill alone is reputed to have collected $104 million in speaking fees over the last 15 years.
In the future, hold the condescension until you're sure you understand the subject at hand.
Hekate
(90,616 posts)I always thought ideological blinders got in the way of that. I guess you do learn something new everyday.