The news about HRC isn't about her campaign

[cali]

It's about perceived problems with the Clinton Foundation. Many warned, long before the Schweizer book was on the horizon that this would be a problem for her if she ran. Her supporters said that purported scandals wouldn't be a problem because all the skeletons in the closet are old and would be no problem.

It's not just the right wing; Common Cause is saying there should be an independent audit and several philanthropy journals and sites are also critical. Bullshit or not, this stuff is gaining traction and it's damaging.

There will be more

HRC will likely win the primary, but I believe she'll be vulnerable in the general.

I don't see that her campaign is off to such a stellar start.

[leftofcool]

1. You do know that the Schweizer has been debunked?

Let's do an independent audit on a charity that takes from rich people in some countries and gives to poor people in others. This is only gaining traction and damaging to anti-Hillary people. But, keep trying. I am sure eventually Trey Gowdy will come up with something you can really use.

[NYC_SKP]

5. You're missing the very point of the OP. The problems are still there. Conflicts of interest.

Favorable rulings for foreign nationals one day.

Contributions to the family charity the next.

I agree with you, let's do an audit and lets see how that money was spent.

The IRS Form 990s are out there but details aren't required.

What a hot mess.

[JaneyVee]

9. What favorable rulings?

[NYC_SKP]

24. Easy Peasey: Largest individual donor to Clinton Foundation, Pinchuk

Newsweek has seen declarations and documents from Ukraine that show a series of shipments from Interpipe to Iran in 2011 and 2012, including railway parts and products commonly used in the oil and gas sectors.

Among a number of high-value invoices for products related to rail or oil and gas, one shipment for $1.8m (1.7m) in May 2012 was for “seamless hot-worked steel pipes for pipelines” and destined for a city near the Caspian Sea.

Both the rail and oil and gas sectors are sanctioned by the US, which specifically prohibits any single invoice to the Iranian petrochemical industry worth more than $1m.


The person in charge of this list of non-US companies is the Secretary of State, who between 2009 to 2013 – the period during which Pinchuk’s company was trading with Iran – was Hillary Clinton.


http://www.newsweek.com/2015/04/24/hillary-clinton-runs-white-house-and-row-over-ukrainian-benefactors-trade-322253.html

Pinchuk and Bill are buds, each attended the other's birthday party, and the Clintons spoke at Pinchuk's conference.

Obviously, deals that shouldn't have gone through went through, and the problem is with the SOS

[Evergreen Emerald]

33. Yes let's hire an attorney and spend millions

Of our tax dollars to find nothing. Oh wait the republicans already did that. This is not about the Clintons. This is about attacking democrats and about our ignorant lazy citizens believing any shit thrown at the dems

[NYC_SKP]

36. Or, let's just drop her like the liability she is and admit our mistake and move on, get a candidate

Last edited Sun Apr 26, 2015, 01:09 PM - Edit history (1)

She can't survive this one.

http://www.newsweek.com/2015/04/24/hillary-clinton-runs-white-house-and-row-over-ukrainian-benefactors-trade-322253.html

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/hillary-clinton-struggles-in-discussing-her-family-wealth/articleshow/37269158.cms

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. I am a small d democrat as well as a big D one

I am content to let the voters decide...

[Evergreen Emerald]

40. Bs

It sounds as if you want the republicans to pick our candidate. This was the same argument last elections...and as we see the way Obama is treated, it does not matter who we choose...the bigfatliars will continue to make shit up.

[cali]

10. as I clearly said, this is not just about Schweizer

Care to take on Common Cause?

And sorry, but this is what is dominating the news about her, not her campaign.

It takes some serious denial to think she's invulnerable and that this isn't damaging

[Agschmid]

2. .

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/04/24/nbc-news-just-admitted-the-ny-times-story-based/203412

[Historic NY]

29. Ouch.....

kinda deflates the ballon.

[Agschmid]

34. But the thread goes on...

[hrmjustin]

3. .

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/04/25/republican-clinton-cash-scandal-collapses-book-released.html

[Thinkingabout]

19. RWer's will rush out and buy this book, I look forward to the emails from the same person

who thinks Hillary could have called in the military in the Benghazi siege even though military officers have testified it was not possible and this person is a retired military guy. I don't know where he is coming to this conclusion except blinded by FOX and the truth.

Do you think he is going to try and go after Jeb next? I have lots of question about the Bush family and have had those questions since before W ran for governor. There is LOTS of connections with the Middle East and Bush family and financing by a bin Laden family. This is where someone should be investigating. Bush made sure the bin Laden family was able to exit the US after 9/11 when many people was stuck in air ports around the US because of the no fly.

[MineralMan]

4. There's plenty of time for HRC to deal with this

lying attack on the part of Schweizer. I know you'd love it if it put her out of the running, but it won't. Not at all. It's not a skeleton in her closet. It's just another round of Clinton-bashing from the right. I'm not sure why you seem unable or unwilling to see that.

But, please proceed. I look forward to your continuing efforts. With each one, your motives appear to be clearer and clearer.

[DURHAM D]

11. Agree 100%

[NYC_SKP]

6. It's a hot mess, this scandal won't go away. She shot herself in the foot.

Her ambition to promote the foundation has crossed purposes with her ambition to be in public office and the two don't mix.

They don't mix.

And now for having tried to have to much, she'll have nothing at all.

Karma, baby.

It's as it should be.

A classy man or woman would step aside and not drag US into their hot mess.

[leftofcool]

12. Keep trying!

[JaneyVee]

13. A classy woman would step aside? GTFOOHWTS.

1-A strong, independent woman wouldn't cower to rightwing propaganda. 2-If Hillary steps aside you'll almost guarantee President Walker. Which side are you on.

[NYC_SKP]

25. I wrote "classy man or woman". nt

[NYC_SKP]

27. If Hillary steps aside, we MIGHT have a chance at winning the general election.

Her insistence that she's the one is going to result in a Walker or a Bush.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

39. "A dream is a wish your heart makes."

&list=RDRl2qZvQg3Lc#t=33

[Thinkingabout]

14. Still waiting to see the facts, an intelligent woman of Hillary's caliber does not get entangled

with the speculation of pushing so very hard for the foundation which gets pushed by a professional pusher, Bill, and continue to do her job as SOS. To step aside would deny the US of a very capable president of the US.

[DURHAM D]

7. Why aren't you also posting all of the Camille Paglia material? nt

[Thinkingabout]

8. Preceived is an open book for some who speculate, the "what if" therories have been on

Rush shows for a long time. Truth about the what if's somehow miss a follow up by Rush, but what the hell, he only wants to plant the seed.

[msanthrope]

15. You sound concerned. Please feel free to air more of your concerns in yet another OP about

your concerns about HRC.

[cali]

18. you sound defensive

[msanthrope]

22. Telling you to "please feel free to air more of your concerns" whilst forgetting to read anything

you actually wrote sounds defensive?

Look, I generally reserve "defensive" for real HRC scandals, like her murder of Vince Foster and the Mena Airport drug running, and her pantsuits. Post about those things, and I might read your OP and comment on its substance.

[NYC_SKP]

16. .

How to phrase this...

[NYC_SKP]

20. You can have an International Foundation, or you can be Secretary of State. You can't have both.

That's the truth of this matter.

Bill and Hillary Clinton are nothing if not ambitious. Hell, they've broken records.

HOWEVER, a person, alone, would never get away with operating an international foundation with hundreds of millions in revenue WHILE acting as Secretary of State.

At least not one meeting with people involved in petroleum and uranium in sensitive areas of the world and allowing funds to go from them to the foundation.

Yet that is EXACTLY what we have here.

"The Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation"

Obama should probably have done her a favor and chosen somebody else.

You can have an International Foundation, or you can be Secretary of State. You can't have both, and then expect to be elected president.

Damn, Hillary. Take a break.

[KoKo]

46. Agree...

see post 45.

[KoKo]

54. I did no such thing and you know that.....

You need to re-read. Or your reading comprehension is flawed. I'd appreciate your editing that vile statement.

[Agschmid]

56. Looks like you are right. Sorry.

[KoKo]

58. Thanks...no problem..

We are all guilty from time to time of speed-reading in "GD" threads. Have done it myself.

[Autumn]

17. There's nothing there IMO but it does allow the pukes and media to keep her on defense

and give the pukes something to drown out their assishness and shortcomings.

[Thinkingabout]

21. The RW has been doing this for years, the RW does not have an answer for the

Clintons but to run this speculation game they play. She is used to this happening, it is old stuff for the Clintons. Just like everyone who dies who may have had their name mentioned near the Clinton and now the Clintons must have had something to do with the deaths. What a crock.

[Autumn]

23. Of course they have done that. I like Bill and Hillary but I don't want another 5 or 9 years of

investigations and defending them against anything and everything the pukes and media can dig up or make up.

[Thinkingabout]

26. I don't want another 5 or 9 years of a GOP .

[Autumn]

28. Then we should encourage other Democrats to run for President. The more the merrier.

[Historic NY]

32. We should encourage Democrats to run for all offices....

we lose when elections go unchallenged and the Republican wins. Want to fix the country then get the state houses,thats where the majority that controls it wins. People need to get out and vote for all their local offices and school boards, etc. Capturing the WH is the cherry but it isn't anything when down channel is in the majorities hands.

[Thinkingabout]

35. Do encourage others to run, I think others does not want to subject themselves

and their families to the attacks in order to run.

[Evergreen Emerald]

31. It cracks me up that you think Clinton is the issue

The treatment Obama received should help you realize the falsity of your argument. It does not matter which democrat runs. The Gop makes shit up. You sound as if you want the Gop to pick our candidate so they won't be so mean.

Hillary Clinton is not the issue. The big fat liars are the issues.

[AuntPatsy]

53. Exactly!

[Marr]

30. The right-of-center Democrats are going to lose this election for us-- AGAIN.

I've little doubt that Clinton will take the nomination, unless she just completely explodes very early. She has the whole party establishment and Wall Street pulling for her. But she's a very weak candidate, imho, and she's proven more than once that she grows weaker over the course of a campaign, not stronger. She just has too much baggage.

It amazes me that conservative Democrats can still summon the gall to talk about Ralph fucking Nader when they've continually, over and over, hoisted weak, vulnerable (though corporate-approved) candidates on the party.

And the real kicker is that, after they lose, they'll blame everyone to their left. Again.

[brooklynite]

42. Right - name a Democrat you can like WHO CAN WIN...

[bigtree]

38. let's see

...republicans are wallowing in the muck; as republicans always do. The media is huffing and puffing; as the media always does. But Democrats are yawning; tired of the faux scandals, and getting a bit irritated, to the point where there's even a swell of support to her defense.

This is a typical presidential campaign where ANY of our front-runners will be subjected to these breathless reports over nearly nothing. More importantly, I think it does little except open the republican candidates to scrutiny of their own compromised money schemes and corruption.

Instead of wringing hands and paling away from her defense, Democrats should recognize WHY these reports are surfacing. No, they're not because Hillary has some fatal flaw that makes her more vulnerable to scandalizing. It's because republicans recognize a real threat to their own positions and prospects in her candidacy. Moreover, these orchestrated stories and rehashed pablum are meant to insulate republican candidates, like Jeb Bush, from their own more egregious and consequential involvement in corporate-sponsored chicanery.

The email stories followed right on the heels of Jeb's own fumbling to provide as innocent a slice of his own email communications as he could afford to release. The foreign money reports concerning the Clinton foundation followed a very public purging of Jeb's associations with corporate boards and foundations which are awash with foreign money and influence (notably Chinese), much of which can be traced directly to his bank account.

So spare us the concern over how 'vulnerable' Hillary may be and try and recall a Democratic candidate who wasn't subject to some puffed-up demagoguery from the republicans and their media allies. Grow a spine and spend at least some of your time holding republicans to account for their corruption, bigotry, and political prevarication, instead of boring us with these Rovian attacks for the brain dead.

[Cali_Democrat]

41. Well said. nt

[revmclaren]

43. Exactly....

[tularetom]

44. Why don't the republican attacks on Clinton ever mention her policy positions?

All you hear is Clinton scandals, shady deals with questionable characters, etc. You never hear attacks on her foreign policy record, or on her relationships with Wall Street.

You don't have to be a Mensa member to figure that out. Republicans don't attack her positions because they are virtually identical to their own. What are they going to do, come out and bad mouth her for wanting to start wars all over the globe? For being in bed with a bunch of crooked bankers? Of course not, it would look ridiculous since they themselves also want to start wars all over the globe and they are also in bed with crooked bankers.

Quite honestly, she'd make a great republican candidate. As a Democrat, not so hot.

[RiverLover]

48. You know, I've never thought of it like that before.

Spot on observation, tularetom! Very true!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

59. She's pro-choice, pro marriage equality, pro ACA, pro increased minimum wage, pro paid family leave.

She's pro-choice, pro same sex marriage, pro ACA, pro increased minimum wage, pro paid family leave, and against turning Medicaid and Food Stamps into block grant programs.

Maybe I am not following the race closely enough so could you please tell me what other presumptive Republican presidential nominees hold those positions.


Thank you in advance.

[tularetom]

61. Pretty much every Democrat in the world is pro all those things

It's the financial regulatory and military industrial complex thingie where her views are in essence identical to those of moderate republicans.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

64. Respectfully, we are moving the goal posts

Republicans don't attack her positions because they are virtually identical to their own.

As I demonstrated there are enough issues where she differs from her Republican opponents, ergo:

She's pro-choice, pro same sex marriage, pro ACA, pro increased minimum wage, pro paid family leave, and against turning Medicaid and Food Stamps into block grant programs.

Occam's Razor- the Republicans don't attack her on those issues because they are, well, popular.

[KoKo]

45. Schweizer Book typical disinfo campaign..imho

Put a book out with inaccuracies that can be focused on and Dems rush to the defense with "same old Repub lies" and articles pointing out the flaws and inaccuracies.

Meanwhile the issues about Bill & Hillary's Foundation Reporting and Hillary's mixing of State Department Policies with Trade Issues usually handled by Secretary of Commerce are moved into the background.

And, frankly, I think that moderate Repubs (not Tea Party) would be very happy with Hillary as President...so its in their interest to join in about the flaws and inaccuracies in the book.

Look at how many Republicans are onboard for the TPP/TPIP when they've denied Obama so many of his Democratic Programs. Hillary is a "Free Trader" what's not to like about that for Corporate Dems and Repubs?

The book is out there for a purpose....to throw a cloak over further investigation. Just as the early reports of Bill's involvement with the sex scandal over the guy (can't remember his name) who was convicted but didn't serve time who was using underage girls for sex who served no "in jail time" but benefited from a house arrest where he could still travel to his favorite homes and continue his activities. Prince Andrew and Tony Blair along with Bill were supposedly involved and the British & U.S. tabloids were all over it an. Even "Free Speech TV's Mike Papantonio did a piece on it because he is friends with the lawyer supposedly handling the lawsuit one of the under aged girls (at the time) was bringing and he thought it was going to be "Huge News." It all got shut down and no "Huge News" has followed. There again, a case of putting out the Sex Thing on Bill again and it goes nowhere but was conveniently timed to get it out there and over with as just more Tabloid Crap and old news.

We've seen this before and it's how MSM/Corporate handles things. Again....imho

[hrmjustin]

47. really?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

60. So this Koch backed guy

So this Koch backed guy who is a member of the Heritage Institute, worked for George Bush and Sarah Palin and wrote this book:





is a sacrificial lamb for who because he wrote a book full of flinty accusations against the Clintons to hide the good ones.


Maybe I would understand it better if I read it with a tin foil hat on.

[hrmjustin]

62. Yeah it is a gem.

Anything to explain away why a bunch of anti-Hillary people got fooled by a gop hack.

[KoKo]

63. Yes..book is filled with inaccuracies as I said in the above post. n/t

[hrmjustin]

65. Yes a book design to take dpwn the Clintons not aid them.

[KoKo]

66. But, it is beyond the Book

Which means that it was a "dog whistle" for Dems to fight back against the Right and the author of this book and to go after WaPo and NYT for being complicit.

Yet, Republican Moderates (not Tea Party) would find Hillary a very comfortable choice for President. So....a Disinfo Book comes out getting Dems Attacking for true inaccuracies and Repubs supposedly pushing it when both the DLC/Third Way Clinton Dems and the Moderate Repubs support "Endless War, Wall Street Bail Outs, Privatization of Education (Rahm Emanuel and Arne Duncan), Secret Trade Deals that the Public doesn't feel the effects of until it bites workers in the ass like NAFTA and now TPP/TPIP and lets "Reform SS & Medicare/Medicade" and the rest of the Repub stuff we've had to deal with. Even the ACA was a Heritage Foundation Proposal championed by Mitt Romney.

Where are the Democrats on Labor, Public Schools and not Vouchers for Private, Charter or Experimental Schools championed by Bush Brothers.

So Much that our Third Way/formerly DLC Dems agree with the "Moderate Repubs" on that the question of "What is the Difference in the Two Parties keeps raising its ugly head.

Are we better off TODAY in AMERICA as WORKERS with Opportunities for our Kids graduating with Huge Dept (still not solved by Obama Administration) without investment in New Jobs in Science, Engineering, Education and Liberal Arts?

What about our corrupted Mainstream Media? What about our crumbling communities and Race Targeting Militarization of our local City/Town Police Forces? What about the Millions who live in Poverty who have no hope for the FUTURE.

What is Clinton II going to propose about this that Obama himself didn't address when He Ran on some of those issues and what we found is that the ONE PERCENT PROFITED and few others did. And, we are spending more than Bush for our Endless Wars in places we never imagined when newly elected Barack Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize shortly after he was Inaugurated.

These are the issues for 2016. When will these issues be Addressed?

[hrmjustin]

67. The point is the book was clearly trying to smear the Clintons without evidence.

[KoKo]

68. Of course it was...but, you didn't address my post about Issues...

[hrmjustin]

69. Your not a fan of Hillary.

I am. I think she will do well defending Democratic priorities.

[KoKo]

70. It's just personal then...

It's okay...I get it. Too much of that around here these days...but... I hope Hillary will get to the point of addressing these crucial issues instead of being the victim of RW Stuff like its been forever...

BTW...if you do a search back to early days of DU...I was posting defending Hillary and Bill. I didn't believe the "Blue Dress" I was totally partisan in defending Bill....I never believed that Monica was telling the truth.

Times change and opinions change. Just wanted you to know that. Maybe you were here under another name and remember or you don't.

But, yes....I've had enough of defending Clintons now that I'm older and see what was going on with policy while we were all here defending the "Big Dog" (as we called him, and in battles with "Free Republic" and the same RW (but expanded) in MSM that we do today. We missed the Deregulation and bad policies that Clinton put in place that harmed us later. Whether he believed in what he supported or MonicaGate coerced him into those positions...all I know is that he turned out not to be the person I worked for and supported thinking he was what many young voters thought Obama would be.

Warren and Sanders are addressing issues I care about. Except for the Endless Wars...which I still wait for anyone to address. The funding for them is bleeding our country and costing us opportunities for our young people. Yet this is not addressed on either side as of now.

[LWolf]

49. How smart is it

for a party to nominate someone who is vulnerable to something like this in the general?

[misterhighwasted]

57. Aaaand another opinion piece from the same one as everyother day

You maybe just wishin a bit too hard for it to be as you say, right here everyday.
Your opinion matters. To you.
Just sayin.