New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

So, what's up with the Clinton Foundation?

Bugsy McGurk

President
You have been tasked with defending two people who (much like yourself) have no credibility what-so-ever. Good luck with that Bob.
Nah, I just like challenging you GOP cultists to support the vague jive your mindbenders tell you to repeat. And you always fail.

;-)
 
S

Sickofleft

Guest
Nah, I just like challenging you GOP cultists to support the vague jive your mindbenders tell you to repeat. And you always fail.

;-)
A blanket defense of the Clintons is not challenging anyone, it's just sad.
 

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
I'm sure he's a little butthurt over how much he's donated to the CF, only to see it go for booze on Hillary's private planes, sex junkets for Bill, and human trafficking for the likes of Carlos Danger.
I'd bet he has never donated a dime
 

Caroljo

Senator
The latest target of the Trump/GOP disgraceful slimeballs.

Read all about the evil work of the Clinton Foundation, run by those very evil people - the Clintons!

;-)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Foundation
Ah....the website that can be 'edited' by just about anyone. Who in heck is Ed Johnston (he edited this page 16 hrs ago). Oh ya...he's a hockey player! Then there's several Rosalind Helderman, a liberal news reporter. Oh...and Maggie Haberman, another liberal reporter for Politico & NY Times. Then there's Stephanie Strom, another LIBERAL reporter for the NY Times. That's just a few names I checked.

Sorry, but Wikipedia is not a very good source for complete truth.
 
Last edited:

Bugsy McGurk

President
Ah....the website that can be 'edited' by just about anyone. Who in heck is Ed Johnston (he edited this page 16 yrs ago). Oh ya...he's a hockey player! Then there's several Rosalind Helderman, a liberal news reporter. Oh...and Maggie Haberman, another liberal reporter for Politico & NY Times. Then there's Stephanie Strom, another LIBERAL reporter for the NY Times. That's just a few names I checked.

Sorry, but Wikipedia is not a very good source for complete truth.
Have at it. Instead of stomping your feet and baldly dismissing their account, dispute something they said with some reliable source.
 
S

Sickofleft

Guest
Agreed, but that's not what I did above. I challenged you wingers to support what they said with your vague "corruption" jive. You failed.
The corruption charge is not vague, and becomes more clear every day.
 
S

Sickofleft

Guest
Sure it is. Just vague jive like "It was a slush fund!" No meat on the bones. You people are good with such complete concoctions - no evidence required.
Sure there is, the Russian Uranium deal that was approved by the State Department at the same time Bill Clinton got 500K for a speech to a company in Moscow that was marketing it. (Which the Russian is hysterical considering all the time the DNC spent screaming about the Russians and Trump........probably don't want people asking to many questions about the "Russians"........;))

According to the Associated Press (a real right wing rago_O), Sec. Clinton spent half her time as Sec. of State meeting with Clinton donors. Odd that........no wonder she traveled so much as the world went to shit.

And NOBODY knows exactly where the money raised for Haiti actually went.
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
Sure there is, the Russian Uranium deal that was approved by the State Department at the same time Bill Clinton got 500K for a speech to a company in Moscow that was marketing it. (Which the Russian is hysterical considering all the time the DNC spent screaming about the Russians and Trump........probably don't want people asking to many questions about the "Russians"........;))

According to the Associated Press (a real right wing rago_O), Sec. Clinton spent half her time as Sec. of State meeting with Clinton donors. Odd that........no wonder she traveled so much as the world went to shit.

And NOBODY knows exactly where the money raised for Haiti actually went.
More absurdly vague innuendo. Faux "facts" stuffed into your head by your handlers without a shred of evidence supporting the innuendo. Like arguing that the sun rises because the roosters crow. Pure nonsense.
 
S

Sickofleft

Guest
More absurdly vague innuendo. Faux "facts" stuffed into your head by your handlers without a shred of evidence supporting the innuendo. Like arguing that the sun rises because the roosters crow. Pure nonsense.
Yeah it really sucks to be you because this all becomes less vague every day.
 
S

Sickofleft

Guest
All media report the Trump/GOP lies and slimeballs.

After all, they are "liberal" and in the tank for Hillary.

;-)
She can start by answering these questions.

1. Among your roughly 55,000 e-mails originally at issue, you claimed that some 30,000 were erased, on your orders, because they were personal. When this scandal first erupted, you said at your March 10, 2015, press conference that these were “e-mails about planning Chelsea’s wedding or my mother’s funeral arrangements, condolence notes to friends,” and similar matters. Most people keep such e-mails as records of major family occasions, both joyous and sorrowful. Why would you erase such communications, given their highly sentimental value?

2. You claimed on March 10, 2015, that you turned over to the State Department “all my emails that could possibly be work-related.” FBI Director Comey revealed on July 5 that, in fact, the Bureau discovered “several thousand” work-related e-mails that you did not deliver to the State Department, as you were required to do under the Federal Records Act. Moreover, on August 22, the FBI reported that 14,900 previously unknown e-mails have surfaced. Why did you not hand over all of these e-mails as you said you did, and as was legally mandated? How many more such e-mails remain under wraps, and when will you surrender them?

3. Did you believe that America’s secrets would be more secure on a computer server in the basement of your home than on one in the basement of the State Department? If so, why? If not, why did you rely on your private server?

4. In your public statements, you claimed to have had one server and one mobile device while secretary of state. FBI Director Comey indicated that, in fact, you “used several different servers” and “mobile devices to send and to read e-mail on that personal domain.” How many private servers did you use, and how many devices did you employ while secretary of state? Why did you lie to the American public about these simple facts?

5. You indicated in your early public statements that you used your private computer server for “convenience.” Please explain why it was so inconvenient to rely on the State Department’s standard operating procedures that you, instead, installed your own private server in the basement of your home in Chappaqua, N.Y., 267 miles northeast of your Washington, D.C. office, paid one or more people to maintain those servers, and then contracted with Denver-based Platte River Networks to remove them from your basement, ship them to a facility in New Jersey, and then erase them. How was this latter approach “convenient”?

6. Did State Department employee Bryan Pagliano maintain the clintonemail.com system? Who else did so, if anyone? Please detail the amounts of money and timing of any payments made to the person or persons who performed these services. What was the source or were the sources of money for these payments? Your personal bank account? President Clinton’s account? The Clinton Foundation? State Department or other federal funds? Other sources? Did Pagliano or any other federal employee(s) perform these or related services on your private system while on duty and serving the American people?

7. Did the staffers, consultants, vendors, attorneys, and others with access to your private servers and devices have security clearance high enough to allow them to see the e-mails that traversed this equipment? If not, why did you grant them such access?

8. You have said that you installed your private system based on the advice of State Department staffers. Who, precisely, provided you this counsel? Given that your private server was installed on the first day of your Senate confirmation hearings, did these State Department employees give you this advice before they had an opportunity to work for you?

9. You repeatedly have said that you never saw or received any e-mails “that were marked classified.” You spent six years as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Given that experience, how could you possibly not recognize classified documents without having to see them marked with the word “classified”?

10. When you received e-mails from U.S. ambassadors, the secretary of defense, the heads of the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency, and other public servants involved in America’s most delicate diplomatic, military, and intelligence activities, how could you possibly think that their official, foreign-policy e-mails were anything but classified, even if they were not so marked?

11. Having seen such sensitive communications — including 113 e-mails that were classified at the time — why did you proceed to forward them via your unsecured, private server?

12. The State Department maintains a secure system through which classified messages pass. In order to transfer classified materials from that system onto a private server, e-mails and other documents must be migrated via thumb drives and similar hardware, or they must be transcribed by hand and then re-typed into non-secure e-mails, such as those found on your server. Did you or any members of your staff use such methods to transfer communications from State’s secure system to your unsecured server? If not, what methods were used to transfer these communications, and who employed them? More Clinton E-mail Scandal If Hillary Is Corrupt, Congress Should Impeach Her The Colin Powell Defense Panetta’s Call to ‘Move On’ From Hillary Emails to ‘Real Issues’

13. One or more e-mails on your private server called Iranian nuclear scientist Shahram Amiri “our friend,” apparently because he gave U.S. officials intelligence on Iran’s atomic-weapons program. The Iranian government eventually hanged Amiri for treason. Do you believe that the e-mails in your system that exposed Amiri as an American spy led to his execution? If so, would you take this opportunity to apologize to Mr. Amiri’s family for contributing to his death?

14. Do you now concede that your abuse of these state secrets constitutes felonious gross negligence under the Federal Espionage Act — 18 U.S. Code § 793? If not, why not?

15. Given your grossly negligent, or at least, as FBI Director Comey described it, “extremely careless” handling of classified data, why should the American people trust you to safeguard state secrets if you become president of the United States?


Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439275/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-judicial-watch-questions
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
She can start by answering these questions.

1. Among your roughly 55,000 e-mails originally at issue, you claimed that some 30,000 were erased, on your orders, because they were personal. When this scandal first erupted, you said at your March 10, 2015, press conference that these were “e-mails about planning Chelsea’s wedding or my mother’s funeral arrangements, condolence notes to friends,” and similar matters. Most people keep such e-mails as records of major family occasions, both joyous and sorrowful. Why would you erase such communications, given their highly sentimental value?

2. You claimed on March 10, 2015, that you turned over to the State Department “all my emails that could possibly be work-related.” FBI Director Comey revealed on July 5 that, in fact, the Bureau discovered “several thousand” work-related e-mails that you did not deliver to the State Department, as you were required to do under the Federal Records Act. Moreover, on August 22, the FBI reported that 14,900 previously unknown e-mails have surfaced. Why did you not hand over all of these e-mails as you said you did, and as was legally mandated? How many more such e-mails remain under wraps, and when will you surrender them?

3. Did you believe that America’s secrets would be more secure on a computer server in the basement of your home than on one in the basement of the State Department? If so, why? If not, why did you rely on your private server?

4. In your public statements, you claimed to have had one server and one mobile device while secretary of state. FBI Director Comey indicated that, in fact, you “used several different servers” and “mobile devices to send and to read e-mail on that personal domain.” How many private servers did you use, and how many devices did you employ while secretary of state? Why did you lie to the American public about these simple facts?

5. You indicated in your early public statements that you used your private computer server for “convenience.” Please explain why it was so inconvenient to rely on the State Department’s standard operating procedures that you, instead, installed your own private server in the basement of your home in Chappaqua, N.Y., 267 miles northeast of your Washington, D.C. office, paid one or more people to maintain those servers, and then contracted with Denver-based Platte River Networks to remove them from your basement, ship them to a facility in New Jersey, and then erase them. How was this latter approach “convenient”?

6. Did State Department employee Bryan Pagliano maintain the clintonemail.com system? Who else did so, if anyone? Please detail the amounts of money and timing of any payments made to the person or persons who performed these services. What was the source or were the sources of money for these payments? Your personal bank account? President Clinton’s account? The Clinton Foundation? State Department or other federal funds? Other sources? Did Pagliano or any other federal employee(s) perform these or related services on your private system while on duty and serving the American people?

7. Did the staffers, consultants, vendors, attorneys, and others with access to your private servers and devices have security clearance high enough to allow them to see the e-mails that traversed this equipment? If not, why did you grant them such access?

8. You have said that you installed your private system based on the advice of State Department staffers. Who, precisely, provided you this counsel? Given that your private server was installed on the first day of your Senate confirmation hearings, did these State Department employees give you this advice before they had an opportunity to work for you?

9. You repeatedly have said that you never saw or received any e-mails “that were marked classified.” You spent six years as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Given that experience, how could you possibly not recognize classified documents without having to see them marked with the word “classified”?

10. When you received e-mails from U.S. ambassadors, the secretary of defense, the heads of the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency, and other public servants involved in America’s most delicate diplomatic, military, and intelligence activities, how could you possibly think that their official, foreign-policy e-mails were anything but classified, even if they were not so marked?

11. Having seen such sensitive communications — including 113 e-mails that were classified at the time — why did you proceed to forward them via your unsecured, private server?

12. The State Department maintains a secure system through which classified messages pass. In order to transfer classified materials from that system onto a private server, e-mails and other documents must be migrated via thumb drives and similar hardware, or they must be transcribed by hand and then re-typed into non-secure e-mails, such as those found on your server. Did you or any members of your staff use such methods to transfer communications from State’s secure system to your unsecured server? If not, what methods were used to transfer these communications, and who employed them? More Clinton E-mail Scandal If Hillary Is Corrupt, Congress Should Impeach Her The Colin Powell Defense Panetta’s Call to ‘Move On’ From Hillary Emails to ‘Real Issues’

13. One or more e-mails on your private server called Iranian nuclear scientist Shahram Amiri “our friend,” apparently because he gave U.S. officials intelligence on Iran’s atomic-weapons program. The Iranian government eventually hanged Amiri for treason. Do you believe that the e-mails in your system that exposed Amiri as an American spy led to his execution? If so, would you take this opportunity to apologize to Mr. Amiri’s family for contributing to his death?

14. Do you now concede that your abuse of these state secrets constitutes felonious gross negligence under the Federal Espionage Act — 18 U.S. Code § 793? If not, why not?

15. Given your grossly negligent, or at least, as FBI Director Comey described it, “extremely careless” handling of classified data, why should the American people trust you to safeguard state secrets if you become president of the United States?


Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439275/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-judicial-watch-questions
Jeez, a virtual pastiche of the GOP's Hillary canards. Try to remember topics.
 
Top