Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
. The rating is based on what the Clintons give themselves and from donors who had better give them an A if they want access.The Clinton Foundation is rated A by Charity Watch. The foundation spends 88% of donations on Charitable Programs.All the exposes on the Clinton foundation are a mess because there is just not much to expose. The foundation spends 88% of all donations on charitable programs in dozens of underdeveloped countries. The fact that dozens of foundations are donating tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation is a good sign that the money is being well spend. These foundations such as the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation spend a lot time and resources investigation before they donate. They not only look at the statistics that show were the money is going but how effective the programs are.Associated Press botches Hillary Clinton report and response
Hillary Clinton is surrounded by suggestions of controversy. Terms like "Clinton Foundation," "email server," and "Benghazi" hover around her like a faint smoke that hints at the existence of fire.
But finding the fire -- the lie, the misdeed, the unethical act -- is proving to be rather difficult, as evidenced this week by an inaccurate tweet and arguably misleading story from the Associated Press that were quickly rebutted by the Clinton campaign and dismissed by many media outlets
"The AP's big exposé on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess," his headline read.
------------
Oops!
------------
The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad
But having looked into it, the reporters do not seem to have found any special favors. That in and of itself is an interesting conclusion. There has been a lot of discussion around potential conflicts of interest related to the Clinton Foundation, so the absence of any clear evidence of actual misconduct is a useful contribution to our understanding.
The story the AP wrote — full of arbitrary math, sensationalistic tweets, and strange insinuations — is not.
----------------------------------------
Trump and the GOP has put themselves into the position of needing to apologize to Hillary Clinton. Republicans say where there is smoke, there's fire. Only Republicans create the smoke and then look for the fire. 30 years of smoke and no fire.
Republicans have to be getting pretty desperate to attack the Clinton Foundation in an attempt to discredit Hillary. Like most of the Clinton attacks, this one will fail.
88 percent????? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Only if that charity is the Clinton crime family......
Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch
If you only knew how stupid you seem for a willfully clueless statement like that. You know damn well why the DOJ refuses to indict her.With all the "evidence", Republicans must be the most stupid fucks in the world for not being able to convict her of anything
It already has faAll the exposes on the Clinton foundation are a mess because there is just not much to expose. The work they do is extensively documented and they have more financial information available on line than the Red Cross or most any charity. The foundation spends 88% of all donations on charitable programs in dozens of underdeveloped countries. The fact that dozens of foundations are donating tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation is a good sign that the money is being well spend. These foundations such as the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation spend a lot time and resources investigation before they donate. They not only look at the statistics that show were the money is going but they investigate how effective the programs are.Associated Press botches Hillary Clinton report and response
Hillary Clinton is surrounded by suggestions of controversy. Terms like "Clinton Foundation," "email server," and "Benghazi" hover around her like a faint smoke that hints at the existence of fire.
But finding the fire -- the lie, the misdeed, the unethical act -- is proving to be rather difficult, as evidenced this week by an inaccurate tweet and arguably misleading story from the Associated Press that were quickly rebutted by the Clinton campaign and dismissed by many media outlets
"The AP's big exposé on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess," his headline read.
------------
Oops!
------------
The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad
But having looked into it, the reporters do not seem to have found any special favors. That in and of itself is an interesting conclusion. There has been a lot of discussion around potential conflicts of interest related to the Clinton Foundation, so the absence of any clear evidence of actual misconduct is a useful contribution to our understanding.
The story the AP wrote — full of arbitrary math, sensationalistic tweets, and strange insinuations — is not.
----------------------------------------
Trump and the GOP has put themselves into the position of needing to apologize to Hillary Clinton. Republicans say where there is smoke, there's fire. Only Republicans create the smoke and then look for the fire. 30 years of smoke and no fire.
Republicans have to be getting pretty desperate to attack the Clinton Foundation in an attempt to discredit Hillary. Like most of the Clinton attacks, this one will fail.
Is "conservative" a political party butt munch?Like most conservatives on this board you are crude and disgusting.Anyone that believes that the Clinton Foundation is anything other than a slush fund for them have their heads up their collective asses. Leftards believe in Hitlery because they WANT to believe that she is pristine....fact of the matter is that she is filthy and as corrupt as they come.She is guilty of theft, guilty of extortion and bribery. She has used agencies to intimidate opponenents and now that she is in the final stages of the election, dead bodies are popping up but leftards say "Nothing to see here, folks!!! Move along!!!"....
If I have said it once, I have said it a THOUSAND times over the last 20 plus years...when it comes to the Clintons, the leftard clown posse has a huge blind spot.
I have no loyalty to any political party but thanks for proving that you are an idiot that never did any background checking on the person you were lamely trying to flame. I have little patience for stupidity and make no apologies for it.
You'll, and the rest of your fellow self-proclaimed conservatives, will be back to bashing the AP and the rest of the "lamestream" media as you so aptly like to put it.As is the usual the left turns on the MSM that does not support the lie that is Hillary Clinton. The left must have been around when Capone was in charge of the Chicago mob. He was guilty of nothing but tax evasion because that is all he was convicted of. That is the logic of the out of control left wing.
Now they must destroy the AP, and they will do it, no matter how much the AP has been in Hillary's corner. Shame on the AP for trying to do some real journalism.
Nailed it!There is a grain of truth in what you say. It's impossible to defend against accusations that are continually changing. At first, the Clinton Foundations was attacked because a lot money was going into programs that Republicans hated such as planned parenthood and secular non-religious charities abroad. Then the foundation was attacked because it was founded while Bill Clinton was president making it a political target. When Hillary was a Senator, Republicans were claiming she was selling her vote to foreign interest for donations to the foundation. When the records showed this was false, opponents attacked Hillary for misusing foundation funds, namely travel. This died because it was shown, the only travel she did for the foundation were fund raisers. Then the foundation was attacked with claims that it was propagating anti-American ideas. It was claimed that it wasn't a charitable foundation because it did not operate as other charitable foundations operated; that is the Clinton Foundation operated it's on programs. When Charity Navigator placed it on their watch-list because they had no way of rating a foundation which operated it's own programs, opponents had all the proof they needed to proclaim the foundation a scam. And when Charity Navigation, took the foundation off the watch-list, opponents began trying to tie the foundation to the Clinton email scandal which will die when Clinton is elected but that will not stop the accusation against the foundation and Clinton.The Clinton Foundation is rated A by Charity Watch. The foundation spends 88% of donations on Charitable Programs.All the exposes on the Clinton foundation are a mess because there is just not much to expose. The foundation spends 88% of all donations on charitable programs in dozens of underdeveloped countries. The fact that dozens of foundations are donating tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation is a good sign that the money is being well spend. These foundations such as the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation spend a lot time and resources investigation before they donate. They not only look at the statistics that show were the money is going but how effective the programs are.Associated Press botches Hillary Clinton report and response
Hillary Clinton is surrounded by suggestions of controversy. Terms like "Clinton Foundation," "email server," and "Benghazi" hover around her like a faint smoke that hints at the existence of fire.
But finding the fire -- the lie, the misdeed, the unethical act -- is proving to be rather difficult, as evidenced this week by an inaccurate tweet and arguably misleading story from the Associated Press that were quickly rebutted by the Clinton campaign and dismissed by many media outlets
"The AP's big exposé on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess," his headline read.
------------
Oops!
------------
The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad
But having looked into it, the reporters do not seem to have found any special favors. That in and of itself is an interesting conclusion. There has been a lot of discussion around potential conflicts of interest related to the Clinton Foundation, so the absence of any clear evidence of actual misconduct is a useful contribution to our understanding.
The story the AP wrote — full of arbitrary math, sensationalistic tweets, and strange insinuations — is not.
----------------------------------------
Trump and the GOP has put themselves into the position of needing to apologize to Hillary Clinton. Republicans say where there is smoke, there's fire. Only Republicans create the smoke and then look for the fire. 30 years of smoke and no fire.
Republicans have to be getting pretty desperate to attack the Clinton Foundation in an attempt to discredit Hillary. Like most of the Clinton attacks, this one will fail.
88 percent????? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Only if that charity is the Clinton crime family......
Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch
Hillary Clinton's Clinton Foundation scandal can't be defended
When there is multi-million dollar cottage industry that makes attacking Clinton or anything or anyone associated with the Clinton name a target, there will be unending accusations. As soon as one is discredited, another will take it's place.
"Credible source" to your average rabid rightwinger meaning anything that constantly and/or openly bashes the Clintons and all things Democrat.AP is in serious danger of accidentally becoming a credible source!
Anyone that believes that the Clinton Foundation is anything other than a slush fund for them have their heads up their collective asses. Leftards believe in Hitlery because they WANT to believe that she is pristine....fact of the matter is that she is filthy and as corrupt as they come.She is guilty of theft, guilty of extortion and bribery. She has used agencies to intimidate opponenents and now that she is in the final stages of the election, dead bodies are popping up but leftards say "Nothing to see here, folks!!! Move along!!!"....
If I have said it once, I have said it a THOUSAND times over the last 20 plus years...when it comes to the Clintons, the leftard clown posse has a huge blind spot.
Anyone that believes that the Clinton Foundation is anything other than a slush fund for them have their heads up their collective asses.
All the exposes on the Clinton foundation are a mess because there is just not much to expose. The foundation spends 88% of all donations on charitable programs in dozens of underdeveloped countries. The fact that dozens of foundations are donating tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation is a good sign that the money is being well spend. These foundations such as the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation spend a lot time and resources investigation before they donate. They not only look at the statistics that show were the money is going but how effective the programs are.Associated Press botches Hillary Clinton report and response
Hillary Clinton is surrounded by suggestions of controversy. Terms like "Clinton Foundation," "email server," and "Benghazi" hover around her like a faint smoke that hints at the existence of fire.
But finding the fire -- the lie, the misdeed, the unethical act -- is proving to be rather difficult, as evidenced this week by an inaccurate tweet and arguably misleading story from the Associated Press that were quickly rebutted by the Clinton campaign and dismissed by many media outlets
"The AP's big exposé on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess," his headline read.
------------
Oops!
------------
The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad
But having looked into it, the reporters do not seem to have found any special favors. That in and of itself is an interesting conclusion. There has been a lot of discussion around potential conflicts of interest related to the Clinton Foundation, so the absence of any clear evidence of actual misconduct is a useful contribution to our understanding.
The story the AP wrote — full of arbitrary math, sensationalistic tweets, and strange insinuations — is not.
----------------------------------------
Trump and the GOP has put themselves into the position of needing to apologize to Hillary Clinton. Republicans say where there is smoke, there's fire. Only Republicans create the smoke and then look for the fire. 30 years of smoke and no fire.
Republicans have to be getting pretty desperate to attack the Clinton Foundation in an attempt to discredit Hillary. Like most of the Clinton attacks, this one will fail.
88 percent????? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Only if that charity is the Clinton crime family......
Here you go cock sucker, but I know you really dont give a shit.Millions for only a couple of speeches? Wow, I wouldn't ever call you a fucking liar, so could you post links to where he gets millions for only a couple of speeches? I would appreciate it.
Clinton surpasses $75 million in speech income after lucrative 2010
Helping to propel the former president to his most lucrative year were two events for which he received a combined $1 million. The first was a June 2010 event in Moscow organized by Renaissance Capital. The other was a December speech delivered in the United Arab Emirates for Novo Nordisk, a global health care company. Clinton received $500,000 for each event, which tie for the second-largest payments he has received for a single event. In June 2008, he received $525,000 for a speech at a motivational speaking conference in Edmonton, Canada.
Altogether the Clintons have made over $153 million from speaking fees, most of it from foreign corporations and governments.
$153 million in Bill and Hillary Clinton speaking fees, documented - CNNPolitics.com
And the speaking fees aligne with decisions Hillary made as Secretary of Stae.
Hillary's speaking fees tied to actions her State Department took
Bill Clinton's speaking fees draw new attention as they line up with actions his wife's State Department took between 2009 and 2013
- New report says two dozen different organizations paid former president for speeches while they had issues pending before the State Department while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state
- Clinton campaign, newspaper both say there is no evidence the speeches are linked to the department's actions
- Some of Clinton's speeches were given overseas, such as the city of Abu Dhabi
If you only knew how stupid you seem for a willfully clueless statement like that. You know damn well why the DOJ refuses to indict her.With all the "evidence", Republicans must be the most stupid fucks in the world for not being able to convict her of anything
They have nearly 50 thousand of her emails. How many can you write in four years?Look, idiot. She has had court orders and subpoenas to provide information that she can't find, eventually finds in a desk on the second floor of the White House, or has been erased or can't be provided before election day, and it's the GOP's fault we can't nail her corrupt ass to the wall?With all the "evidence", Republicans must be the most stupid fucks in the world for not being able to convict her of anything.Once again a clinton is involved in a scandal and hides evidence that would be needed to ensure a successful prosecution and her sycophants claim she is innocent.Associated Press botches Hillary Clinton report and response
Hillary Clinton is surrounded by suggestions of controversy. Terms like "Clinton Foundation," "email server," and "Benghazi" hover around her like a faint smoke that hints at the existence of fire.
But finding the fire -- the lie, the misdeed, the unethical act -- is proving to be rather difficult, as evidenced this week by an inaccurate tweet and arguably misleading story from the Associated Press that were quickly rebutted by the Clinton campaign and dismissed by many media outlets
"The AP's big exposé on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess," his headline read.
------------
Oops!
------------
The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad
But having looked into it, the reporters do not seem to have found any special favors. That in and of itself is an interesting conclusion. There has been a lot of discussion around potential conflicts of interest related to the Clinton Foundation, so the absence of any clear evidence of actual misconduct is a useful contribution to our understanding.
The story the AP wrote — full of arbitrary math, sensationalistic tweets, and strange insinuations — is not.
----------------------------------------
Trump and the GOP has put themselves into the position of needing to apologize to Hillary Clinton. Republicans say where there is smoke, there's fire. Only Republicans create the smoke and then look for the fire. 30 years of smoke and no fire.
If nothing else Dweeb, you can be relied upon to amuse sentient beings the world over. Thank you.
Or she is so smart, that she always wins. If that's the case, then I definitely want her for president.
So you'd rather have Adolf Hitler (IQ 150) or Richard Nixon (IQ 147) than John Kennedy (IQ 119) as POTUS. Or do ethics only matter when you dislike someone's politics? You are WAY too easy, Dweeb.
Why would you say something so incredibly retarded? You are questioning the integrity of an INDEPENDENT organization simply because you don't want to believe what they report.. The rating is based on what the Clintons give themselves and from donors who had better give them an A if they want access.The Clinton Foundation is rated A by Charity Watch. The foundation spends 88% of donations on Charitable Programs.All the exposes on the Clinton foundation are a mess because there is just not much to expose. The foundation spends 88% of all donations on charitable programs in dozens of underdeveloped countries. The fact that dozens of foundations are donating tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation is a good sign that the money is being well spend. These foundations such as the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation spend a lot time and resources investigation before they donate. They not only look at the statistics that show were the money is going but how effective the programs are.Associated Press botches Hillary Clinton report and response
Hillary Clinton is surrounded by suggestions of controversy. Terms like "Clinton Foundation," "email server," and "Benghazi" hover around her like a faint smoke that hints at the existence of fire.
But finding the fire -- the lie, the misdeed, the unethical act -- is proving to be rather difficult, as evidenced this week by an inaccurate tweet and arguably misleading story from the Associated Press that were quickly rebutted by the Clinton campaign and dismissed by many media outlets
"The AP's big exposé on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess," his headline read.
------------
Oops!
------------
The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad
But having looked into it, the reporters do not seem to have found any special favors. That in and of itself is an interesting conclusion. There has been a lot of discussion around potential conflicts of interest related to the Clinton Foundation, so the absence of any clear evidence of actual misconduct is a useful contribution to our understanding.
The story the AP wrote — full of arbitrary math, sensationalistic tweets, and strange insinuations — is not.
----------------------------------------
Trump and the GOP has put themselves into the position of needing to apologize to Hillary Clinton. Republicans say where there is smoke, there's fire. Only Republicans create the smoke and then look for the fire. 30 years of smoke and no fire.
Republicans have to be getting pretty desperate to attack the Clinton Foundation in an attempt to discredit Hillary. Like most of the Clinton attacks, this one will fail.
88 percent????? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Only if that charity is the Clinton crime family......
Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch
"Is this rating different than what you expected based on what the charity reports about itself or what other raters report about this charity? Read about what makes CharityWatch's independent ratings different from other sources of information."
Who keeps count. Clinton conspiracies theories popup daily. The latest witch hunt seems to have the objective of finding an email among the 50,000 that indicates Clinton might have solicited a charitable donation on the state dept email. Of course it that solicitation is for the Red Cross, you will never hear about it but if it's for the Clinton foundation, it will be the beginning of a new theory build on the theory that Clinton is siphoning funds out of the foundation. Opps, I just started a new conspiracy theory.All the exposes on the Clinton foundation are a mess because there is just not much to expose. The foundation spends 88% of all donations on charitable programs in dozens of underdeveloped countries. The fact that dozens of foundations are donating tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation is a good sign that the money is being well spend. These foundations such as the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation spend a lot time and resources investigation before they donate. They not only look at the statistics that show were the money is going but how effective the programs are.Associated Press botches Hillary Clinton report and response
Hillary Clinton is surrounded by suggestions of controversy. Terms like "Clinton Foundation," "email server," and "Benghazi" hover around her like a faint smoke that hints at the existence of fire.
But finding the fire -- the lie, the misdeed, the unethical act -- is proving to be rather difficult, as evidenced this week by an inaccurate tweet and arguably misleading story from the Associated Press that were quickly rebutted by the Clinton campaign and dismissed by many media outlets
"The AP's big exposé on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess," his headline read.
------------
Oops!
------------
The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad
But having looked into it, the reporters do not seem to have found any special favors. That in and of itself is an interesting conclusion. There has been a lot of discussion around potential conflicts of interest related to the Clinton Foundation, so the absence of any clear evidence of actual misconduct is a useful contribution to our understanding.
The story the AP wrote — full of arbitrary math, sensationalistic tweets, and strange insinuations — is not.
----------------------------------------
Trump and the GOP has put themselves into the position of needing to apologize to Hillary Clinton. Republicans say where there is smoke, there's fire. Only Republicans create the smoke and then look for the fire. 30 years of smoke and no fire.
Republicans have to be getting pretty desperate to attack the Clinton Foundation in an attempt to discredit Hillary. Like most of the Clinton attacks, this one will fail.
88 percent????? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Only if that charity is the Clinton crime family......
OK, so now you're declaring the foundation's
financials are somehow cooked even though they were accepted by the IRS. Their personal taxes were accepted by the IRS. Both are available for public scrutiny.
So I guess you would have to say the IRS is now covering for them as well for that to have any chance at being true.
How many conspiracies involving the Clintons are we up to?
Don't give the GOP ideas.Who keeps count. Clinton conspiracies theories popup daily. The latest witch hunt seems to have the objective of finding an email among the 50,000 that indicates Clinton might have solicited a charitable donation on the state dept email. Of course it that solicitation is for the Red Cross, you will never hear about it but if it's for the Clinton foundation, it will be the beginning of a new theory build on the theory that Clinton is siphoning funds out of the foundation. Opps, I just started a new conspiracy theory.All the exposes on the Clinton foundation are a mess because there is just not much to expose. The foundation spends 88% of all donations on charitable programs in dozens of underdeveloped countries. The fact that dozens of foundations are donating tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation is a good sign that the money is being well spend. These foundations such as the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation spend a lot time and resources investigation before they donate. They not only look at the statistics that show were the money is going but how effective the programs are.Associated Press botches Hillary Clinton report and response
Hillary Clinton is surrounded by suggestions of controversy. Terms like "Clinton Foundation," "email server," and "Benghazi" hover around her like a faint smoke that hints at the existence of fire.
But finding the fire -- the lie, the misdeed, the unethical act -- is proving to be rather difficult, as evidenced this week by an inaccurate tweet and arguably misleading story from the Associated Press that were quickly rebutted by the Clinton campaign and dismissed by many media outlets
"The AP's big exposé on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess," his headline read.
------------
Oops!
------------
The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad
But having looked into it, the reporters do not seem to have found any special favors. That in and of itself is an interesting conclusion. There has been a lot of discussion around potential conflicts of interest related to the Clinton Foundation, so the absence of any clear evidence of actual misconduct is a useful contribution to our understanding.
The story the AP wrote — full of arbitrary math, sensationalistic tweets, and strange insinuations — is not.
----------------------------------------
Trump and the GOP has put themselves into the position of needing to apologize to Hillary Clinton. Republicans say where there is smoke, there's fire. Only Republicans create the smoke and then look for the fire. 30 years of smoke and no fire.
Republicans have to be getting pretty desperate to attack the Clinton Foundation in an attempt to discredit Hillary. Like most of the Clinton attacks, this one will fail.
88 percent????? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Only if that charity is the Clinton crime family......
OK, so now you're declaring the foundation's
financials are somehow cooked even though they were accepted by the IRS. Their personal taxes were accepted by the IRS. Both are available for public scrutiny.
So I guess you would have to say the IRS is now covering for them as well for that to have any chance at being true.
How many conspiracies involving the Clintons are we up to?
Are Rice and Powell running for POTUS, you dumb fuck? Did Powell or Rice send classified documents from an email server hidden away in their personal home?They have nearly 50 thousand of her emails. How many can you write in four years?Look, idiot. She has had court orders and subpoenas to provide information that she can't find, eventually finds in a desk on the second floor of the White House, or has been erased or can't be provided before election day, and it's the GOP's fault we can't nail her corrupt ass to the wall?With all the "evidence", Republicans must be the most stupid fucks in the world for not being able to convict her of anything.Once again a clinton is involved in a scandal and hides evidence that would be needed to ensure a successful prosecution and her sycophants claim she is innocent.Associated Press botches Hillary Clinton report and response
Hillary Clinton is surrounded by suggestions of controversy. Terms like "Clinton Foundation," "email server," and "Benghazi" hover around her like a faint smoke that hints at the existence of fire.
But finding the fire -- the lie, the misdeed, the unethical act -- is proving to be rather difficult, as evidenced this week by an inaccurate tweet and arguably misleading story from the Associated Press that were quickly rebutted by the Clinton campaign and dismissed by many media outlets
"The AP's big exposé on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess," his headline read.
------------
Oops!
------------
The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad
But having looked into it, the reporters do not seem to have found any special favors. That in and of itself is an interesting conclusion. There has been a lot of discussion around potential conflicts of interest related to the Clinton Foundation, so the absence of any clear evidence of actual misconduct is a useful contribution to our understanding.
The story the AP wrote — full of arbitrary math, sensationalistic tweets, and strange insinuations — is not.
----------------------------------------
Trump and the GOP has put themselves into the position of needing to apologize to Hillary Clinton. Republicans say where there is smoke, there's fire. Only Republicans create the smoke and then look for the fire. 30 years of smoke and no fire.
If nothing else Dweeb, you can be relied upon to amuse sentient beings the world over. Thank you.
Or she is so smart, that she always wins. If that's the case, then I definitely want her for president.
So you'd rather have Adolf Hitler (IQ 150) or Richard Nixon (IQ 147) than John Kennedy (IQ 119) as POTUS. Or do ethics only matter when you dislike someone's politics? You are WAY too easy, Dweeb.
And why don't you say anything about Rice or Powell. Together, they turned over a grand total of ZERO. How can they get away with that? Hmmm? Say something.
OOOOHHHH. So it only counts if you are running for president.Are Rice and Powell running for POTUS, you dumb fuck? Did Powell or Rice send classified documents from an email server hidden away in their personal home?They have nearly 50 thousand of her emails. How many can you write in four years?Look, idiot. She has had court orders and subpoenas to provide information that she can't find, eventually finds in a desk on the second floor of the White House, or has been erased or can't be provided before election day, and it's the GOP's fault we can't nail her corrupt ass to the wall?With all the "evidence", Republicans must be the most stupid fucks in the world for not being able to convict her of anything.Once again a clinton is involved in a scandal and hides evidence that would be needed to ensure a successful prosecution and her sycophants claim she is innocent.Associated Press botches Hillary Clinton report and response
Hillary Clinton is surrounded by suggestions of controversy. Terms like "Clinton Foundation," "email server," and "Benghazi" hover around her like a faint smoke that hints at the existence of fire.
But finding the fire -- the lie, the misdeed, the unethical act -- is proving to be rather difficult, as evidenced this week by an inaccurate tweet and arguably misleading story from the Associated Press that were quickly rebutted by the Clinton campaign and dismissed by many media outlets
"The AP's big exposé on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess," his headline read.
------------
Oops!
------------
The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad
But having looked into it, the reporters do not seem to have found any special favors. That in and of itself is an interesting conclusion. There has been a lot of discussion around potential conflicts of interest related to the Clinton Foundation, so the absence of any clear evidence of actual misconduct is a useful contribution to our understanding.
The story the AP wrote — full of arbitrary math, sensationalistic tweets, and strange insinuations — is not.
----------------------------------------
Trump and the GOP has put themselves into the position of needing to apologize to Hillary Clinton. Republicans say where there is smoke, there's fire. Only Republicans create the smoke and then look for the fire. 30 years of smoke and no fire.
If nothing else Dweeb, you can be relied upon to amuse sentient beings the world over. Thank you.
Or she is so smart, that she always wins. If that's the case, then I definitely want her for president.
So you'd rather have Adolf Hitler (IQ 150) or Richard Nixon (IQ 147) than John Kennedy (IQ 119) as POTUS. Or do ethics only matter when you dislike someone's politics? You are WAY too easy, Dweeb.
And why don't you say anything about Rice or Powell. Together, they turned over a grand total of ZERO. How can they get away with that? Hmmm? Say something.
Let's say, for the sake of argument that Rice and Powell used a non government email server. Does that suddenly make it right?
Come ON Dweeb! You used to be amusing and even occasionally sentient. WTF happened to you? Leave the meth alone boy!
We DO know a lot of what hillary clinton sent. According to the FBI Director, some of it was classified.OOOOHHHH. So it only counts if you are running for president.Are Rice and Powell running for POTUS, you dumb fuck? Did Powell or Rice send classified documents from an email server hidden away in their personal home?They have nearly 50 thousand of her emails. How many can you write in four years?Look, idiot. She has had court orders and subpoenas to provide information that she can't find, eventually finds in a desk on the second floor of the White House, or has been erased or can't be provided before election day, and it's the GOP's fault we can't nail her corrupt ass to the wall?With all the "evidence", Republicans must be the most stupid fucks in the world for not being able to convict her of anything.Once again a clinton is involved in a scandal and hides evidence that would be needed to ensure a successful prosecution and her sycophants claim she is innocent.
If nothing else Dweeb, you can be relied upon to amuse sentient beings the world over. Thank you.
Or she is so smart, that she always wins. If that's the case, then I definitely want her for president.
So you'd rather have Adolf Hitler (IQ 150) or Richard Nixon (IQ 147) than John Kennedy (IQ 119) as POTUS. Or do ethics only matter when you dislike someone's politics? You are WAY too easy, Dweeb.
And why don't you say anything about Rice or Powell. Together, they turned over a grand total of ZERO. How can they get away with that? Hmmm? Say something.
Let's say, for the sake of argument that Rice and Powell used a non government email server. Does that suddenly make it right?
Come ON Dweeb! You used to be amusing and even occasionally sentient. WTF happened to you? Leave the meth alone boy!
Powell had an AOL account. You know, AOL. Not a government server. It's why he had zero emails to turn over. So we don't know what he sent. Do you?
