LOL - Snopes unable to debunk accusation of Clinton Foundation money-laundering

[FourScore]

http://www.snopes.com/krauthammer-clinton-foundation-laundering/

[rpannier]

1. 2. Foreign oligarch's

Doesn't sound like anything Krauthammer would say
He loves oligarch's American or other wise

[FourScore]

2. They debunked the author but not the content!!

[rpannier]

3. I read the piece andx I know what they said

I'm just curious as to who would be stupid enough to believe Krauthammer would write something like that

[FourScore]

5. Most americans don't even know who he is. n/t

[Major Hogwash]

7. Oh, Krauthammer is capable of writing dogshit like that.

They just haven't proven that he didn't write it this time, is all.

He used to refer to Obama as the Kenyan President of the United States.

[rpannier]

9. I can see him saying that about Obama

I just have a hard time seeing him use the word 'oligarch' in a derisive fashion

[Ghost Dog]

13. Which foreign oligarch's what?

There are many oligarchs in the world, and they all have a lot of posessions.

Or, erroneous grammatical garbage. Sheesh.

[procon]

4. That's not what it says at all!

It only says "research in progress", so what's the purpose of posting such a misleading falsehood?

[FourScore]

6. Yeah. Since January. So they are unable to debunk it.

LOL

[procon]

16. If there's nothing to substantiate, then why are you spreading rumors

for Republicans?

[BillZBubb]

31. There is something to substantiate it. It's in the emails.

Is it proof beyond a reasonable doubt? Not yet.

[puffy socks]

58. Oh is it? It's in the emails , is it? Where? Do you have them?

Because if you do I'm certain that would be the story of the year!

[puffy socks]

57. It hasn't been proven either since January.

making this just another rumor spread by Bernie supporters who profess to hate such political tactics.

[creeksneakers2]

8. That's not what is says

"With respect to this piece's myriad assertions about the Clinton Foundation, we are in the process of researching those claims."

Another lie about the Clintons. This one from an E-mail hoax. None of the money from the foundation goes into the Clinton's pockets. Multiple audits and investigations haven't turn up a single dime going to the Clintons.

The Clintons have done wonderful things for the world with their charity. Clinton haters can't stand it that the Clintons are good people, so they have to invent smears about money laundering and slush funds. That's disgusting.

[jehop61]

11. Thank you

They are getting as goofy as tea party folks are about Pres. Obama

[HooptieWagon]

12. The Clintons don't take salaries.

But Foundation money is used for First class air travel and many other Clinton expenses. And they've put loyal friends and aides on the payroll, like Blumenthall, who apparently do no Foundation-related work. Looks like a slush fund to me. Funded by large corporations and foreign governments. Quid pro quo on an epic scale.

[creeksneakers2]

25. Why would the Clintons break the law to get travel?

They travel all the time already. Hillary logged more miles than any other Secretary of State. A night at home would be a luxury for them, not travel.

Friends and associates on the payroll look bad when you look at it that way, but the Clintons run the foundation and its normal for people running an operation to turn to people they know and trust to work for them.

[karynnj]

37. Hillary logged fewer miles than Condi Rice -- and Kerry has exceeded both of them

However, no one is talking of the travel - and there was a huge amount - as Secretary of State, they are speaking of the time AFTER she was Secretary of State.

What I would argue is that ANY travel she made to give those speeches etc SHOULD be paid for out of the money earned even as it was all given to the Clinton Foundation.

I think the accusation on friends etc, is speaking of people not working on any stated project of the Clinton Foundation. Blumenthal was mentioned because it appears he was paid by the CF because Obama did not allow HRC to hire him at the SD.

I think MANY think tanks and foundations act as resting spots for top people working with potential candidates when there are no active campaigns. If you think about it, it is a win/win situation. Top strategists are able to develop plans and programs in the think tank on issues that they AND the think tank want progress on. Many Democrats who worked on various campaigns go to places like Center for American Progress: Republicans go to American Enterprise Institute. Where it can get tricky is when say John Edwards sets up a Poverty institute that largely functioned as his campaign in waiting between 2005 and 2008. However, if you think about it, without these positions, it would be difficult for the party out of power to continue developing its positions and having a voice.

The Clinton Foundation actually was more hands on in actually doing work than the various think tanks, but it is no surprise that people like Abedin and Mills were hired there for a period of time. One would imagine their goals, HRC'sgoals, and the foundation's goals are pretty similar.

[creeksneakers2]

47. You sound like you really know what you are talking about

But I still can't believe the Clintons set up a multibillion dollar multinational NGO and took bribes to get money to pay Sid Blumenthal.

[karynnj]

49. I did not say they did

Obviously, the foundation was established to allow Bill Clinton to use his name recognition, talent, contacts and persuasion to take on projects to do things he, Hillary and Chelsea think important.

The Foundation existed for years before HRC became Secretary. It is true that Blumenthal was employed there when HRC could not hire him. In addition, it did provide employment for some top HilLary people between the SD and the start of her campaign.

[COLGATE4]

35. With 11% of the Foundations money going to administration

they sure aren't making much of a slush fund. And as you well know, there's no evidence of any quid pro quo with foreign governments and/or corporations. But you keep spreading that crap anyway.

[HooptieWagon]

38. Saudis gave $10 million to the Foundation prior to Clinton okaying arms deal.

The arms manufacturers kicked in a million more. That's a quid pro quo no matter how deep you bury your head in the sand. She's up to her neck in graft and corruption.

[COLGATE4]

40. You know that all arms deals have to be approved by the Senate

and that they take years to complete. The Saudi arms deal was approved long before she was ever SOS so the whole meme about cash to play is just false. The one that's ignoring facts is you.

[creeksneakers2]

48. All that Saudi money

was also given prior to Hillary becoming secretary of state. I wasn't possible to make an arms deal with the money because nobody knew Hillary was going to be secretary of state. The money goes all the way back to 2001. While she was secretary of state, the Saudis stopped giving the foundation money. So its not my head that's buried.

[Bread and Circus]

15. Everything I have read indicates all is not well with that foundation. You might wanna 'look into it

as Hillary often says.

[creeksneakers2]

24. I've been looking into it

And charges I've looked into turned out to be BS when I took a closer look.

[Bread and Circus]

26. Sure...

[FlatBaroque]

41. I also just burst out laughing reading that eloquent and convincing reply...

[dchill]

27. You might want to notify snopes.com of your findings.

They evidently don't know how to take a closer look.

[creeksneakers2]

28. They are probably very busy

with all the lies coming out about Hillary, both from enemies on the right and left. They probably didn't have time for this one.

[dchill]

29. Well, I'm sure you'll take a closer look.

[BillZBubb]

32. Sure you have! And with an open mind too! We believe you!

[creeksneakers2]

44. I've decided Hillary was wrong many times

I believe I'm more objective than the folks here who loved the article that linked Hillary to something that looked like a bomb that was found near an Arizona voter assistance office.

[FlatBaroque]

42. Your credentials are surely unimpeachable,

and your argument is air-tight.

[creeksneakers2]

62. I'm not an authority

and I didn't claim to be. I was responding to a post that told me to "look into it."

[LAS14]

51. What are you reading? Read the ratings of the...

... organizations that rate foundations. The Clinton foundation gets really high marks.

[Bread and Circus]

52. The Clinton Foundation is at least partly used to launder money for the Clintons and their friends.

It is also used to trade for political favors.

Here is one example:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/hillary-clinton-foundation-state-arms-deals

Hillary Clinton Oversaw US Arms Deals to Clinton Foundation Donors
An investigation finds that countries that gave to the foundation saw an increase in State Department-approved arms sales.

In 2011, the State Department cleared an enormous arms deal: Led by Boeing, a consortium of American defense contractors would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, despite concerns over the kingdom's troublesome human rights record. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, Saudi Arabia had contributed $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, and just two months before the jet deal was finalized, Boeing donated $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to an International Business Times investigation released Tuesday.

The Saudi transaction is just one example of nations and companies that had donated to the Clinton Foundation seeing an increase in arms deals while Hillary Clinton oversaw the State Department. IBT found that between October 2010 and September 2012, State approved $165 billion in commercial arms sales to 20 nations that had donated to the foundation, plus another $151 billion worth of Pentagon-brokered arms deals to 16 of those countries—a 143 percent increase over the same time frame under the Bush Administration. The sales boosted the military power of authoritarian regimes such as Qatar, Algeria, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman, which, like Saudi Arabia, had been criticized by the department for human rights abuses.

[LAS14]

55. Baloney!

[Bread and Circus]

59. You asked for a source, I gave you Mother Jones, you say "Baloney!" David Brock would be proud.

It seems like you are a typical Hillbot. I hope you enjoy your payment.

[That Guy 888]

17. "Wonderful things" depending on which side of the "thing" you're on, ask the Haitians.

The King and Queen of Haiti

There’s no country that more clearly illustrates the confusing nexus of Hillary Clinton’s State Department and Bill Clinton’s foundation than Haiti—America’s poorest neighbor.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/05/clinton-foundation-haiti-117368_Page4.html#ixzz46mxEfWf4
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

How the Clintons’ Haiti development plans succeed — and disappoint

...Nevertheless, the Clintons are facing a growing backlash that too little has been accomplished in the past five years and that some of the most high-profile projects they have backed — including a just-opened Marriott, another luxury hotel and the industrial park — have helped foreign investors and Haiti’s wealthy elites more than its poor.

“Bill Clinton is a good guy and well-intentioned, but the people here don’t think so — they think he’s here making money,” said Leslie Voltaire, a former government official who worked with Clinton on post-earthquake reconstruction. “There is a lot of resentment about Clinton here. People have not seen results. .?.?. They say that Clinton used Haiti.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-the-clintons-haiti-development-plans-succeed--and-disappoint/2015/03/20/0ebae25e-cbe9-11e4-a2a7-9517a3a70506_story.html

That’s how Caracol Industrial Park, a 600-acre garment factory geared toward making clothes for export to the U.S., was born in 2012. Bill lobbied the U.S. Congress to eliminate tariffs on textiles sewn in Haiti, and the couple pledged that through Caracol Park, Haitian-based producers would have comparative advantages that would balance the country’s low productivity, provide the U.S. with cheap textiles, and put money in Haitians’ pockets.

The State Department promised that the park would create 60,000 jobs within five years of its opening, and Bill declared that 100,000 jobs would be created “in short order.” But Caracol currently employs just 5,479 people full time. “The entire concept of building the Haitian economy through these low-wage jobs is kind of faulty,” Katz stated on Monday. Furthermore, working conditions in the park are decent, but far from what should be considered acceptable.

Not only did Caracol miss the mark on job creation, but it also took jobs away from indigenous farmers. Caracol was built on fertile farmland, which Haiti doesn’t have much of to begin with. According to Katz, Haitian farmers feel that they have been taken advantage of, their land taken away from them, and that they have not been compensated fairly.

Hundreds of families have been forced off the land to make room for Caracol. The Clintons led the aggressive push to make garment factories to better Haiti’s economy, but what it really created was wealth for foreign companies. This trend was echoed when the Clintons helped launch a Marriott hotel in the capital, which has really only benefited wealthy foreigners and the Haitian elite.

http://africasacountry.com/2015/07/hillary-haiti/

Clearly the Clintons' plans in Haiti have been "wonderful" for some. Bold portions are emphasized by me, and not in the original text.

[creeksneakers2]

23. You are picking out one thing

out of the many that they do.

https://www.clintonfoundation.org/

Haiti didn't turn out as well as they hoped yet, but it looks like the projects are still active and can grow.
As for working with rich people, it's hard to get things done without them.

They have something like 1.4 million people getting AIDs drugs. How about that?

[That Guy 888]

33. What happens when you ask someone who makes a profit if their profits are ethically earned?

Does Black Lives Matter (or most thinking people) believe internal police investigations?

"Still active and can grow"? I think it turned out exactly like they hoped.

Perhaps the AIDs drugs help ease Bill's guilty conscience. See Factor 8: The Arkansas Prison Blood Scandal (2005)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0782849/

Arkansas Bloodsuckers

by Jeffrey St. Clair - Alexander Cockburn

The year Bill Clinton became governor of Arkansas, the Arkansas state prison board awarded a lucrative contract to a Little Rock company called Health Management Associates or HMA. The company was paid $3 million a year to run medical services for the state’s troubled prison system, which had been excoriated in a ruling by the US Supreme Court as an “evil place run by some evil men.”

HMA not only made money from providing medical care to prisoners, but it also started a profitable side venture: blood mining. The company paid prisoners $7 a pint to have their blood drawn. HMA then sold the blood on the international plasma market for $50 a pint, splitting 50 percent of the proceeds with the Arkansas Department of Corrections. Since Arkansas is one of the few states that does not pay prisoners for their labor, inmates were frequent donors at the so-called “blood clinic”. Hundreds of prisoners sold as much as two pints a week to HMA. The blood was then sold to pharmaceutical companies, such as Bayer and Baxter International, blood banks, such as the Red Cross, and so-called blood fractionizers, which transformed the blood into medicines for hemophiliacs.

http://www.counterpunch.org/1999/06/15/arkansas-bloodsuckers/

[creeksneakers2]

45. I don't see what's wrong

with prisoners getting a chance to make some money. I used to donate plasma in the free world and $7 was what they paid too.

I don't get your point about black lives matter.

You think Haiti turned out exactly like the Clintons hoped? Why would they want their project to produce fewer jobs than was planned?

[That Guy 888]

60. Of course, nothing wrong with AIDs and Hepatitus tainted blood being sold.

"I used to donate plasma in the free world and $7 was what they paid too."

Except that wasn't the rate "in the free world" at the time, which makes me think you didn't get paid such a paltry amount... or didn't sell your blood. If you donate it, the Red Cross doesn't pay you, that's why it's a donation.

I don't get your point about black lives matter.

I love deliberate obtuseness. It allows me to write like I'm communicating with someone incapable of grasping simple concepts. See when one or more police officers are possibly involved in a crime, like killing someone, they do what is called an "Internal Investigation". An Internal Investigation usually means that only their fellow police officers will review the circumstances around the potential crime . Now many people including Black Lives Matter feel that this is a "fraudulent" or "corrupted" investigation, because it is assumed that no matter the circumstances, witnesses, or even video capturing what happened, that such investigation will lead to one conclusion. That conclusion being that the police, after thoroughly investigating the police, will find that the police did nothing wrong and the killing was "justified". So lets look for example, to the case of Tamir Rice. After a thorough investigation the Cleveland PD found that while video showed Tamir Rice was shot without any warning and within 2 seconds of the police officers' arrival, and that the officers involved did not render aid, the Cleveland PD's "Internal Investigation" ruled that their killing of an unarmed 12 year old boy was "reasonable". Outcomes like that imply that often groups, really any group like... say the Clinton Foundation, aren't always honest with their "internal investigations". Not to say they're EVIL( a few are, but not the point here), or even evil, just that sometimes groups feel it's easier to lie than to admit responsibility for errors, unethical behavior or crime. So checking the website of "The Clinton Foundation" to see if "The Clinton Foundation" admits to any errors, unethical behavior, or crime is quite simply ludicrous. I hope that helps you "get my point".

You think Haiti turned out exactly like the Clintons hoped?

Yes, but it isn't my opinion. I'm merely agreeing with many, probably a majority of Haiti's citizens. It's the opinion of people in Haiti, well the opinion of people in Haiti that aren't part of "Haiti's elite, or wealthy foreigner's&quot see above, Reading Is Fundamental) that the Clinton Foundation's work in Haiti was for creating wealth for foreigner's, foreign companies and corporations, and the Haitian elite.

Why would they want their project to produce fewer jobs than was planned?

Who says they did or did not want their project to produce jobs? We do know the result of the Clinton Foundation "getting things done" in Haiti though, right. If your not clear on what "things", check the links provided. Oh, but that might seem a little lame, so hears some one sentence speculations, flesh them out or not.

Maybe influence gained in brokering the deal was enough?

Maybe they took their eye's off the ball?

Maybe they didn't give a rat's ass once the camera's stopped rolling.

[HooptieWagon]

39. Haiti turned out exactly as intended.

Screw the people while the wealthy line their pockets. It's how crony capitalism is designed.

[creeksneakers2]

46. I'll ask you the same question

Why would the Clintons intend for their project to produce fewer jobs than were planned?

[Dem2]

19. Another attempt by the fake "Democrats" to take down out likely Democratic candidate?

This is getting kind of serious - I hope the slander stops at some point, I'm sure Free Republic doesn't need any help.

[randome]

10. The Clinton Foundation is a public -not private- charity. There are laws regarding that.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[Gwhittey]

14. Totaly right

I mean if there was something going on with it the FBI would of subpoenaed the foundations records.

[mmonk]

18. Ha!

[Squinch]

20. As I have said before, there is no law that says that everything that Sanders supporters say has to

be a lie.

You are allowed to tell the truth sometimes.

[JackRiddler]

21. How could they? That's often what rich people foundations are for.

Let's not pretend they have x-ray vision into the movements of offshore money.

[demwing]

22. You can easily tell that Krauthammer didn't write this

because whoever did write it has no clue on how to use a damn comma.

[Sparkly]

30. So other than the facts that...

1. It cropped up in social media
2. The attribution is bogus so the author is unknown
3. There's no evidence showing the charge is true

... if it's on the INTERNET, and you like what it says, it MUST be true, right?

[COLGATE4]

34. False. Snopes merely says that it is unable to attribute the e-mail

accusation of money laundering by the Clinton Foundation to the supposed author Charles Krauthammer. Snopes goes on to say that the topic of the e-mail (money laundering) is undetermined and that they are investigating that part of the e-mail. It never says that they are 'unable to debunk' the accusation. It's a misleading headline.

[ViseGrip]

36. Our structure, with the collusion of the Clinton's is just so bad!

[closeupready]

43. Tammany Hall. Look it up.

Better yet, click here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tammany_Hall#Machine_politics_versus_the_reformers

[LAS14]

50. We're witnessing the birth of a smear.

It's ridiculous to post the subject you did when all Snopes said was that the author was false and they are researching the content.

[COLGATE4]

53. Absolutely. This is the type of crap we would normally see

on Fux News. Doesn't belong on DU regardless of which candidate you support.

[lovemydog]

54. Anyone can make an accusation.

An accusation of impropriety or illegality cannot be disproven by Snopes.

That's why in our country one is innocent of an accusation of criminality unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.

[Aerows]

56. It's not really an accusation

if it is a fact.

[JSup]

61. So guilty...

...until proven innocent by Snopes? Really?