More shady Clinton foundation stuff uncovered (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 09, 2024, 05:55:42 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  More shady Clinton foundation stuff uncovered (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: More shady Clinton foundation stuff uncovered  (Read 5743 times)
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,037


« on: April 26, 2015, 12:57:44 AM »
« edited: April 26, 2015, 01:00:42 AM by Beet »

What about all the good that the Clinton foundation has done?

According to their website, "Because of our work, more than 27,000 American schools are providing kids with healthy food choices in an effort to eradicate childhood obesity; more than 85,000 farmers in Malawi, Rwanda, and Tanzania are benefiting from climate-smart agronomic training, higher yields, and increased market access; more than 33,500 tons of greenhouse gas emissions are being reduced annually across the United States; over 350,000 people have been impacted through market opportunities created by social enterprises in Latin America, the Caribbean, and South Asia; through the independent Clinton Health Access Initiative, 9.9 million people in more than 70 countries have access to CHAI-negotiated prices for HIV/AIDS medications; $200 million in strategic investments have been made, impacting the health of 75 million people in the U.S.; and members of the Clinton Global Initiative community have made nearly 3,200 Commitments to Action, which have improved the lives of over 430 million people in more than 180 countries."

Has anyone tried to verify these claims? If even a fraction of this stuff were true, it'd be pretty awesome. If people wanted, they could track down someone in the developing world, who is getting HIV/AIDS medications for a lower price thanks to the Clinton foundation, and ask what they think. But of course, no one really cares what such people think. Looking for every shadow of impropriety is more important?
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,037


« Reply #1 on: April 26, 2015, 10:53:38 AM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Ah, so that's what Chait's piece is about. When will the media stop throwing their toys out of the pram and accept that Warren isn't running and the Democratic primary won't be competitive?

I think they hardly try to hide their intentions by now. The next step is sponsoring push polls that ask people if they know that Hillary's hobby is torturing kittens.

I knew for a while that the media was going to be extremely tough on Hillary, much moreso than any other candidate, but they've far exceeded my expectations with these constant hit jobs. It's an unholy alliance between the "liberal media", the "nonpartisan media", and the "conservative media" to try to destroy her. At this point, I don't even think the liberal media cares if they get President Walker or Bush in the process. It will get them more clicks and ad revenue if there's a Republican president, after all.

you know, maybe if the entire media is "conspiring" against you, it's not actually conspiring and you're just wrong.

The entire media was beating the drums for the Iraq war in 2002-2003. Obama's stimulus policies were also pretty much universally panned in 2009.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,037


« Reply #2 on: April 26, 2015, 11:03:11 AM »

Adam, how has the conflict of interest been debunked?

No one has ever expected from the start that donors to the Clinton foundation could have no business with the State Department.

Besides that, as with so many charges against the Clintons, no quid pro quo has ever actually been proven, there has only been a lot of innuendo stirred up.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

It isn't just Clinton partisans alleging bias though, the media themselves have admitted they're biased against Hillary repeatedly.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,037


« Reply #3 on: April 26, 2015, 12:38:35 PM »


Not so interested in the witch hunts against Hillary. But not going to ditch her just because they're happening, either.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,037


« Reply #4 on: April 26, 2015, 09:24:45 PM »

so not interested in another 1.5 to 9.5 years of this

Hillary Clinton will destroy the Dem party.

In fact it can be argued the Dem party never quite recovered from the 1994 mid term elections thanks to the Clintons. Since that time the GOP has held the House for 18/22 years. Oh yeah yeah Gerrymandering. Well the GOP couldnt Gerrymander if they didnt control the majority of state legislatures and governors mansions, another gift from 1994 and the Clintons

As a right winger, you seem awfully worried about the Clintons. Smiley
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,037


« Reply #5 on: April 26, 2015, 10:04:25 PM »

bobloblaw is a Hillary sympathizer who has her as her 2nd or 3rd choice and is just looking out for the good of the party, guys.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 13 queries.