BeaverCleaver
Footballguy
And name all those fake scandals and investigations Congress has conducted against Obama?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
- Status
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
This has it as $200K. That's according to Blumenthal.
This has him working from 2009 to 2013 for the Foundation at $10K per month. Squiz's article was the source article & has the same info.
So you can take it as Blumenthal getting paid 200K per year by the Foundation for all that work, including his extracurricular spy work for Hillary, or you can take it in as $120K in addition to the $200K. Your pick. I took it as getting paid $200K as that was Blumenthal's testimony. However maybe $120K by the Foundation and $200K by David Brock makes more sense.
NONE of it sounds charitable.
Last edited by a moderator:
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
Why would you conflate payments from David Brock's organization with payments from the Clinton Foundation?
BeaverCleaver
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I shouldn't however it's just as improper if MM was paying him for personal work he was doing for the Clintons. Now he was getting 200K from MM and 120K from the Foundation. When does running private Intel from Drumheller & Johnson come into his employment for a blog or charity. I'd say MM has a problem too based on what you've pointed out.
Last edited by a moderator:
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Because an entity is paying him for one thing when he's really doing something else. Speaking of conflation the lines are getting pretty blurred actually. Two different entities were paying SB for work he did for Hillary.
When does the charity aspect for the Foundation come in?
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
What are you talking about? Do you know how retainers and consulting contracts work? Consultants can be working simultaneously for dozens of clients.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
He's not saying Hillary paid him, now is he.
Again the point is about the Foundation, it was paying him a large chunk of change for what, exactly? He's a political consultant and his client is Hillary. But Hillary didn't pay him, the Foundation paid him.
Last edited by a moderator:
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
As usual, no substance and nothing of value from your posts. I'll go back to ignoring you.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
It was the OP by Tim I was responding to. I've previously said the Foundation does good work (including in NO) my point has to do with the nature of the Foundation itself. Blumenthal was obviously not working in a charitable capacity or maybe even as a distinct entity as it appeared to be paying SB a lot for work he was doing for Hillary personally.
BeaverCleaver
Footballguy
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
squistion
Footballguy
No, he wasn't out in Africa giving meds to people with AIDS, but not every one working for a charity is working in a chartable capacity, whatever that means.
My take from what was has been said about his position publicly, is that is was in a PR type position. If people are going to donate to the Clinton Foundation, the better pubic image of Bill and the works of the Foundation, the more people are likely to contribute (in theory anyway). Helping the Foundation raise money indirectly as a PR person is important in any charity - maybe not as important as the doctors and people on the ground, but still I think it is unfair to dismiss it as not being hands on in the charitable work itself.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
That's from Squis' link.
Blumenthal was interviewed by the FBI. He wasn't questioned about his charitable work (or pr work or blogging). He was doing work for (see Ranbo's link from ProPublica above) Osprey (a successor of Blackwater), Constellations, and Hillary, all while writing memos on intelligence from Drumheller and Johnson and other political work for Hillary.
The problem isn't that he was being paid by MM and the Foundation, or that he wasn't doing work for them (he may have been), the problem is that it looks like Hillary was not paying him at all but these entities were - for work that he was doing for Hillary.
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion
Footballguy
He and Hillary are personal friends. He was giving her his take on things, doesn't mean giving his opinion was doing work for her and that he was a hired hand. Please.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Ok I'm not going to struggle over it anymore. Blumenthal was sending intelligence reports from hired gun ex CIA operatives. These were long detailed memos with intelligence. He also wrote more complex political (domestic and foreign issues) and intelligence consulting memos himself. If you want to think that he did this for 4 years uncompensated go right ahead.
Last edited by a moderator:
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
How much do you get paid for the thousands of hours you spend on these boards exploring right wing conspiracy theories? Yet you're sure Sid wouldn't share analysis or briefings he was doing for other entities with one of his close personal friends?
G
Guest
Guest
Dear, sweet, naive Tommy. Clintons are corrupt. They make sure their cronies are fed red meet and green dollars. If ever we had perfect information that weren't obstructed, you'd see a wave of payments flowing out and an a wave coming back in. It's an industry. And it works in the way that industries work. Organized, efficient and based on incentives.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I don't see the secret conspiracy. Blumenthal using the 'sbwhoeop' (White House Executive Office Personnel) email address indicated he thought he was working for Hillary and wanted people to think so, don't you think? They also emailed each other over 1000 times.
Last edited by a moderator:
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
It wasn't an accusation. Note I've said good things about the Foundation's work. I asked Tim, who asked about criticism of the Foundation considering they do good work, to explain Blumenthal's role at the Foundation because that wasn't charitable and it looks like he was on its payroll wholly or partly for work he did for Hillary. That was political work, not charitable, and it blurs the line of the Foundation as a separate independent entity. - That's it.
The Commish
Footballguy
Anybody remember my comment(s) early in this thread about being able to determine intent based on the "how" these things were deleted? I know....I know!!! Hillary herself didn't delete them!!!!!
G
Guest
Guest
Amazing if someone wants to create a foundation and use their talents and connections for good.
Except when you or your spouse are still directly involved in government, or aspire to be. Until that's over, give to another foundation. As long as you or your spouse are directly involved in politics, you should not even work for any organization that accepts donations for 5 years.
In the end, government works best with the assumption that our leaders will behave badly, because eventually many will. He presumption of innocence is pragmatic when it comes to these matters. Hard lines.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Yeah great point, it adds one more buffer of separation for Hillary doesn't it. Just plug in the software, set the parameters and let it go. That probably would have greatly shortened the time they worked on it too. I'd like to know how Bleachbit works. I guess what happened is they deleted whatever they wanted deleted, deleted some more of what was left over, printed the remainder and then deleted the rest. The use of software is not something anyone really contemplated but that was a great call on your part.
eta - Then again I guess using bleach is an excellent way to wipe things clean.
Last edited by a moderator:
MaxThreshold
Footballguy
That's funny coming from the guy who believes anything that comes out of Hillary's (or Obama's) mouth - no questions asked.
You tow the party line so well for the Democrats that Pravda calls your posts propaganda. I don't think you've EVER had an original thought of your own.
Last edited by a moderator:
HellToupee
Footballguy
Rohn Jambo
Footballguy
He was not doing it for free. The fact that he was paid a salary ($200K a year) means he was a hired hand.
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion
Footballguy
Taking what I said out of context if you read what I was responding to. I was referring to the allegation that his foundation job was a sham and the he was actually working directly for Hillary to advise her. No dispute that was hired by the Foundation, so of course since they paid him a salary, he would be a hired hand as would any employee.
HellToupee
Footballguy
squistion
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
What are your thoughts on why Blumenthal was using the SBWHOEOP email address? That extension indicates White House Executive Staff Personnel.
squistion
Footballguy
Dude, at least I have rebuttals. You and MOP repeatedly trashed Hillary and expressed outrage for having the Orlando shooter's father behind her at a rally, however you both refused to discuss teen sexual predator Mark Foley sitting behind Trump in the VIP section at his rally. You ignored requests by multiple posters to explain why Foley's presence was acceptable to you and to this day we still haven't gotten your opinion on that.
Actually, what was a hoot was your complete deflection of the Foley story by discussing in depth the play Hamilton with Tim in the Trump thread.
Rohn Jambo
Footballguy
Sid was supposed to work on educational programs for the Clinton Foundation, but the guy sent more than 1000 emails to coordinate covert operations. If there is a "Family Feud" question on what he really did for Hillary, survey would not say the #1 answer is charity work.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
That phrase actually started with the good government transparency group Sunlight Foundation, its leader Bill Alison used that phrase to describe the Clinton Foundation in that way last year.
Do you understand what slush fund means?
timschochet
Footballguy
Rohn Jambo
Footballguy
What I found interesting was Sid Blumenthal's "buddy" and "Democrat assassin" David Brock prepared an ad calling on Bernie Sanders to release his medical records before the Iowa caucuses and Hillary's campaign chairman John Podesta told him to back off.
squistion
Footballguy
Makes sense, it would have been indirectly bringing up the age issue that Bernie was vulnerable on. Hillary pulled her punches on some subjects and played neither the Socialist nor the age card, so as to not antagonize Bernie's supporters.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Rohn Jambo
Footballguy
I think a more logical conclusion is Hillary's medical record is worse than Bernie's.
HellToupee
Footballguy
Huma Abedin’s mom linked to shocking anti-women book
As secretary of state, women’s-rights champ Hillary Clinton not only spoke at a Saudi girls school run by her top aide Huma Abedin’s anti-feminist mother, but Clinton invited the elder Abedin to participate in a State Department event for “leading thinkers” on women’s issues.
This happened despite evidence at the time that Saleha M. Abedin had explored the religious merits of sexual submissiveness, child marriage, lashings and stonings for adulterous women, and even the circumcision of girls.
The elder Abedin, whose daughter helps run Clinton’s presidential campaign, did take a pro-gender-equality stance on at least one issue: Muslim women’s right to participate in violent jihad alongside men.
–– ADVERTISEMENT ––
As The Post first reported, Huma’s mom edits the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, which has suggested that America had 9/11 coming to it, because of “sanctions” and “injustices” the US allegedly imposed on the Muslim world.
The journal also opposed women’s rights as un-Islamic, arguing that “ ‘empowerment’ of women does more harm than benefit.”
But that’s not all.
In 1999, Saleha translated and edited a book titled “Women in Islam: A Discourse in Rights and Obligations,” published by the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs. Written by her Saudi colleague Fatima Naseef, the book explains that the stoning and lashing of adulterers, the killing of apostates, sexual submissiveness and even female genital mutilation are all permissible practices under Sharia law.
“The wife should satisfy her husband’s desire for sexual intercourse,” the book states on Page 202, even if she is not in the mood. “She has no right to abstain except for a reasonable cause or legal prohibition.”
But getting in the mood may be difficult. The book says female genital mutilation is permissible: “Circumcision for women is allowed.”
Laws promoting feminist equality, moreover, are ineffectual, since “man-made laws have in fact enslaved women, submitting them to the cupidity and caprice of human beings. Islam is the only solution and the only escape.”
And forget about working in a position of authority: “Her job would involve long hours of free mixing and social interaction with the opposite sex, which is forbidden in Islam,” the book says.
Modal Trigger
Huma Abedin on the campaign trail with Hillary Clinton.Photo: Getty Images
“Moreover, women’s biological constitution is different from that of men. Women are fragile, emotional and sometimes unable to handle difficult and strenuous situations,” it explained. “Men are less emotional and show more perseverance.”
There is one exception to the sexual division of roles: “Women can also participate in fighting when jihad becomes an individual duty.”
On the back cover, Saleha says she is “pleased to launch” the book as part of a series on the study of women’s rights in Islam sponsored by the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child (IICWC), for which she is listed as chairperson.
Founded by Huma’s mom, the Cairo-based IICWC has advocated for the repeal of Egypt’s Mubarak-era laws in favor of implementing Sharia law, which could allow female genital mutilation, child marriage and marital rape.
Saleha is paid by the Saudi government to advocate and spread Sharia in non-Muslim countries like America.
In 1995, less than three weeks before Clinton gave her famous women’s-rights speech in Beijing, Saleha headlined an unusual Washington conference organized by the Council on American-Islamic Relations to lobby against the UN platform drafted by Clinton and other feminists. Visibly angry, she argued it runs counter to Islam and was a “conspiracy” against Muslims.
Specifically, she called into question provisions in the platform that condemned domestic battery of women, apparently expressing sympathy for men who commit abuse.
Pakistan-born Saleha maintained that men who serially beat women tend to be unemployed, making their abuse somehow more understandable. “They are victims of a different kind,” she claimed. “And they are simply taking [their frustrations] out on women.”
Despite all this, Huma Abedin in 2010 arranged for Clinton, then the secretary of state, to travel to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, to meet with her mother and speak at a girls school she founded and helps run as dean. Speaking to a roomful of girls, Clinton said Americans have to stop stereotyping Saudi women as oppressed, before assuring the audience that not all American women go “around in a bikini bathing suit.”
While there, Clinton formed a partnership with Saleha’s Dar al-Hekma college called the US-Saudi Women’s Forum on Social Entrepreneurship, and promised to reverse post-9/11 curbs on Saudi student visas to America.
‘The wife should satisfy her husband’s desire for sexual intercourse.’
- from a book translated and edited by Saleha Abedin
The next year, Clinton invited Saleha and the president of the Saudi school to Washington to participate in a State Department colloquium on women, as revealed by internal emails released in response to a lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch.
Clinton campaign spokesman Nick Merrill told the Post that while Huma Abedin was in fact listed as an editorial staffer of her mother’s radical journal from 1996 to 2008, she didn’t really do anything for the publication in her long tenure there.
Asked if Clinton regrets honoring the Islamist mother and bestowing legitimacy on her extreme views, Merrill had no comment.
Paul Sperry is author
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Ok so if you and I and the Sunshine Foundation view slush fund the same way I think these are two major issues for the Foundation:
- The top heavy salaries, large salaries and hiring people like Blumenthal strictly at Bill & Hillary's whim with no visible individual indication they do anything for the entity as opposed to the founders.
- The fact that the Foundation took in up to $26 million in payments to the Clintons, so the Clintons did not pay taxes on it.
These kinds of instances of lack of distinction between founders and the entity and also lack of hiring or financial firewalls are usually hallmarks of slush fund entities. Hope that helps you understand the issue.
eta - It's obvious the Foundation does good work, that is not what the term 'slush fund' refers to though.
Last edited by a moderator:
Rohn Jambo
Footballguy
I would like to see the Clinton Foundation's IRS returns so I can decide for myself if there's a slush fund or not.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
Similar threads
