Freewill
Platinum Member
- Oct 26, 2011
- 31,158
- 5,072
- 1,130
How long will the left ignore Hillary's many many short comings?
Benghazi, OK she had nothing directly to do with those killed. She didn't order them in, she didn't directly reduce security and she didn't do anything to incite the attack, directly. BUT when something bad happens usually the CEO takes the fall. After all she wanted the power of SoS but refuses to accept the responsibility in a meaningful way. As a supervisor I know if one of my crew hurts themselves in any way I will take most of the blame, so should have Hillary and Obama but they did the liberal dance.
Now it is revealed that the Clinton's profited by her stay as SoS. There is little doubt that they are dirty as hell and if there is a shred of doubt why take a chance? Why nominate such a person of so little accomplishment other then name recognition. Is that really where the democrat party has fallen? I hope so because the destruction will be fun to watch.
Fact-checking Clinton Cash author on claim about Bill Clinton s speaking fees PunditFact
For example, New York Times reporters -- building off of Schweizer’s work -- found that while the State Department was involved in securing a uranium mining deal with Russia, investors in the company involved in the deal, Uranium One, gave millions to the Clinton Foundation.
Additionally, "shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock."
The article’s talking about speech No. 3 on the list above, the 2010 speech paid for by Renaissance Capital.
ABC News also examined Clinton’s speaking records and found many instances in which he took in money from groups with pending interests at the State Department. State Department ethics officials had to sign off on these speaking engagements, but rarely did they say Clinton could not accept payment for a particular speech.
Benghazi, OK she had nothing directly to do with those killed. She didn't order them in, she didn't directly reduce security and she didn't do anything to incite the attack, directly. BUT when something bad happens usually the CEO takes the fall. After all she wanted the power of SoS but refuses to accept the responsibility in a meaningful way. As a supervisor I know if one of my crew hurts themselves in any way I will take most of the blame, so should have Hillary and Obama but they did the liberal dance.
Now it is revealed that the Clinton's profited by her stay as SoS. There is little doubt that they are dirty as hell and if there is a shred of doubt why take a chance? Why nominate such a person of so little accomplishment other then name recognition. Is that really where the democrat party has fallen? I hope so because the destruction will be fun to watch.
Fact-checking Clinton Cash author on claim about Bill Clinton s speaking fees PunditFact
For example, New York Times reporters -- building off of Schweizer’s work -- found that while the State Department was involved in securing a uranium mining deal with Russia, investors in the company involved in the deal, Uranium One, gave millions to the Clinton Foundation.
Additionally, "shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock."
The article’s talking about speech No. 3 on the list above, the 2010 speech paid for by Renaissance Capital.
ABC News also examined Clinton’s speaking records and found many instances in which he took in money from groups with pending interests at the State Department. State Department ethics officials had to sign off on these speaking engagements, but rarely did they say Clinton could not accept payment for a particular speech.
