USA Politics

Ethics and Clinton really do not belong in the same sentence

http://in.reuters.com/article/usa-election-foundation-idINKBN12Z2SX

The Clinton Foundation has confirmed it accepted a $1 million gift from Qatar while Hillary Clinton was U.S. secretary of state without informing the State Department, even though she had promised to let the agency review new or significantly increased support from foreign governments.

Qatari officials pledged the money in 2011 to mark the 65th birthday of Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton's husband, and sought to meet the former U.S. president in person the following year to present him the check, according to an email from a foundation official to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign chairman, John Podesta. The email, among thousands hacked from Podesta's account, was published last month by WikiLeaks.

Clinton signed an ethics agreement governing her family's globe-straddling foundation in order to become secretary of state in 2009. The agreement was designed to increase transparency to avoid appearances that U.S. foreign policy could be swayed by wealthy donors.

If a new foreign government wished to donate or if an existing foreign-government donor, such as Qatar, wanted to "increase materially" its support of ongoing programs, Clinton promised that the State Department's ethics official would be notified and given a chance to raise any concerns.

Clinton Foundation officials last month declined to confirm the Qatar donation. In response to additional questions, a foundation spokesman, Brian Cookstra, this week said that it accepted the $1 million gift from Qatar, but this did not amount to a "material increase" in the Gulf country's support for the charity. Cookstra declined to say whether Qatari officials received their requested meeting with Bill Clinton.

Officials at Qatar's embassy in Washington and in its Council of Ministers in the capital, Doha, declined to discuss the donation.

The State Department has said it has no record of the foundation submitting the Qatar gift for review, and that it was incumbent on the foundation to notify the department about donations that needed attention. A department spokeswoman did not respond to additional questions about the donation.

According to the foundation's website, which lists donors in broad categories by cumulative amounts donated, Qatar's government has directly given a total of between $1 million and $5 million over the years.

The Clinton Foundation has said it would no longer accept money from foreign governments if Clinton is elected president and would spin off those programs that are dependent on foreign governments.
 
Also this. From: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sources-us-intel-warning-of-possible-al-qaeda-attacks-in-us-monday/
U.S. intel warning of possible al Qaeda attacks in U.S. Monday

CBS News has learned about a potential terror threat for the day before the election.

Sources told CBS News senior investigative producer Pat Milton that U.S. intelligence has alerted joint terrorism task forces that al Qaeda could be planning attacks in three states for Monday.

It is believed New York, Texas and Virginia are all possible targets, though no specific locations are mentioned. A U.S. law enforcement source briefed on the threat information told CBS News’ Milton that the threat is possibly legitimate and concerning. The source said the threat may be aspirational and hence the lack of specificity. The source said there has been pressure on al Qaeda and its affiliates AQAP and AQIS (al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent) to regain relevance with its mission.
 
I can't stand Trump...but he's right about this. Seeing a presidential candidate use pop stars to strengthen her campaign really rubs me the wrong way too. its everything that's wrong with this culture really...
This reminds me of how campaigning used to be, when the candidates wouldn't leave home and their surrogates would recruit local celebrities to get people to vote for X or Y. This is neither nothing new nor nothing concerning about democracy.

How seriously should we take this?:
Not at all - that is a friend of Putin, not a member of the government.

The exact same report has popped up in 2004, 2008, 2012. So it does not surprise me. Surely the USA is at its most vulnerable just before the election - but also its most vigilant. But it would take a massive terrorist attack to affect the election.
 
FBI concludes no charges warranted for new crop of Clinton emails.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1310WY

Someone who believes she's a criminal please point to the Federal or state statutes that you believe she's violated. I didn't go to law school, so maybe I'm just naive. I keep hearing about what a crook and a criminal she is but I don't see any evidence of it.

I wonder if Trump University will have a juris doctorate program I could enroll in.
Bigger than Watergate, my ass.
 
I wonder why they said initially that it would take "weeks" to check this out. If they have people who are competent in programming and data analysis (which I'm sure FBI have) it would be a walk in the park to find all e-mails that were either to Clinton or from Clinton. From what I heard/read yesterday, that's what they have done, and concluded that all Clinton-related e-mails on Weiner's laptop had already been part of the previous investigation.
 
The Wikileaks thing really concerns me. Not because I care about the DNC or whatever - they rigged things for Hillary in some ways, but they're a private organization that can pick however they want to nominate their candidate. Sleazy but not illegal. But what concerns me is how happy some people are the DNC got hacked by Russians.
 
Hillary set the reset button with then as Secretary of State .. or whatever the button actually said in Russian. I think her and Obama both underestimated/misread/did not understand them.

We are certainly not back to Cold War level of hostilities .. but relations are not great
 
293.jpg

294.jpg

Just a throwback to 4 years ago! Back then the polls underestimated the voter turnout for Obama.
 
The Wikileaks thing really concerns me. Not because I care about the DNC or whatever - they rigged things for Hillary in some ways, but they're a private organization that can pick however they want to nominate their candidate. Sleazy but not illegal. But what concerns me is how happy some people are the DNC got hacked by Russians.
This is the most disturbing thing of all. Hillary is so disliked (regardless of how justified) that Russia interfering with the election is somehow acceptable now. Or the questionable method of FBI reporting the email case last week.
 
We are not ramping up nukes to point at each other ... I think that keeps us a notch below. But no doubt between Syria, Crimea, East Ukraine, and some provocation towards the Baltic States .. it is certainly not peace and harmony either
 
Back to the election .. I think, sadly, Hillary will probably win .. but the good news is that means Trump does not.

The Dems Senate chances are not looking as good as they were 50-50 is probably their best case now. I see a lot of ticket splitting given the massive negatives Hillary has ... any chances the Dems had at the House (which were really slim to start with) are toast.

GOP should do really well in the mid terms based on they generally get better turnout compared to Dems in the mid terms and the Dems have a lot of contested Senate seats to defend, and Hillary will still be disliked. All of which will have an impact on how they vote between now and 2018 in the Senate as they try to hang onto their seats

Probably 4 more years of divided government, which I am perfectly fine with
 
Lifelong devotion is usually based on one team ... but then most people are not running for the Senate in New York and trying to establish their local cred
 
Back
Top