Hillary For President

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Boreas

You mean like Clarence Thomas?

I don't know about the Judicial Branch. However, the rules are quite clear for the Executive Branch.

[bobabode]

Another thing about Peter Schweizer, he was a policy adviser for Sarah Palin.

'Nuff said.

[djv8ga]

Originally Posted by icenine

Yeah like a year and a half early. Rubio will not be able to get the Latino vote because he has already done a Romney by running away from his own Senate bill.

Put him in the Herbert Cain column.

You're dreaming. Not only will he get Hispanic support, a lot of it will be Latino women.

[djv8ga]

Originally Posted by bobabode

I'm still waiting for someone, anyone to show me how the Clinton's have personally profited from the Clinton foundation. So far, it's crickets or old fake scandals.

By not reporting donations. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...icle-1.2195655

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by djv8ga

By not reporting donations. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...icle-1.2195655

To their charitable organization. This is almost too easy.

“Total revenue was reflected accurately on each year’s tax form, and there was no under- or over-reporting,” spokesman Craig Minassian said.
Minassian told Reuters the foundation would redo the 990 forms they are required to file annually to remain tax-exempt."
(from your own link DJ)

[Rajoo]

From the link in Post 244, these comments are worrisome.

“There’s stuff missing and not there. It shows there’s at least a certain amount of sloppiness,” said Bill Allison of the Sunlight Foundation, a government transparency advocacy group.

“The surprise here is knowing all the close attention all of this was going to get . . . why wasn’t there more sensitivity from the Clintons to say ‘OK, sit down and show me you’re doing this right,’ knowing from a political perspective there’s going to be vulnerability?” said McGehee. “There’s a certain hubris here.”

IMO, there seems to be a certain amount of arrogance on Hillary's part that looks like she believes that she is preordained to be the next President, same as Romney must have felt when he ran in 2012.

I don't believe that the Clinton's benefited monetarily other than income derived from some of his speaking engagements that could be seen as power brokering. This happens all the time anyway so to single out the Clinton's will be a non-starter. But sloppy housekeeping? That's fodder for digging and it has just begun.

[djv8ga]

They didn't report tens of millions of dollars for two years that they received from foreign governments. They were working personally with these people as well as getting speech gigs. Sounds like crime syndicate behavior.

[bobabode]

Meh, I'm still not seeing any evidence of anything illegal. There have been countless questions and allegations over the decades and nothing has ever stuck, despite millions of tax dollars spent on rightwing witch hunts.

She's still going to beat any Repug challenger like a rented mule.

[djv8ga]

If it's going to cost this Queen Midas $$$, she will get out & look for another way to steal money.

[icenine]

I think one has to be indicted to be convicted of a crime.
Under capitalism it is not illegal to receive $500,000 for a speech.

No indictments, no crime. That is the thing about all of these Clinton scandals...there are never any indictments.