Qatar Payment Confirmed

owebo

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
18,638
Reaction score
2,010
Points
260
Location
Washigton, DC
Perhaps that's why the Clinton's moved 1.8 billion dollars of their fortune there...
 

Meathead

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
34,324
Reaction score
8,177
Points
1,330
Location
Prague, Czech Republic
It was a gift for Bill's 65th bday and so none of the business of the State Department. That Bill is the Beast's husband is just coincidence.
 

bullwinkle

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
5,446
Reaction score
757
Points
245
Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
 
OP
Billy_Kinetta

Billy_Kinetta

Paladin of the Lost Hour
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
50,973
Reaction score
19,007
Points
2,280
Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
So, what would be the reason for such a payment other than buying influence?
 

bullwinkle

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
5,446
Reaction score
757
Points
245
Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
So, what would be the reason for such a payment other than buying influence?
Well, maybe for the cause! It is said the Foundation does a lot of good around the world in terms of healthcare and education. I know the Clinton's have capitalized on their name and used it as leverage for their Foundation. And they know where the money is, know whom to hit up. That's an advantage for fund raisers. The difference between you and me is that I do not believe most of it went into their pockets, as is the common theme song among supporters of the pure and pristine Donald who wouldn't dream of deflecting charitable funds into his own ..ummm..portrait? The Clinton unhidden tax records shed some light. I believe they are available for your perusal too.
 

owebo

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
18,638
Reaction score
2,010
Points
260
Location
Washigton, DC
Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
So, what would be the reason for such a payment other than buying influence?
Well, maybe for the cause! It is said the Foundation does a lot of good around the world in terms of healthcare and education. I know the Clinton's have capitalized on their name and used it as leverage for their Foundation. And they know where the money is, know whom to hit up. That's an advantage for fund raisers. The difference between you and me is that I do not believe most of it went into their pockets, as is the common theme song among supporters of the pure and pristine Donald who wouldn't dream of deflecting charitable funds into his own ..ummm..portrait? The Clinton unhidden tax records shed some light. I believe they are available for your perusal too.
Yes they do....about 5% of the money went to anything charitable.....
 
OP
Billy_Kinetta

Billy_Kinetta

Paladin of the Lost Hour
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
50,973
Reaction score
19,007
Points
2,280
Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
So, what would be the reason for such a payment other than buying influence?
Well, maybe for the cause!
:laugh:

Naivete at its best.
 
Last edited:

Freewill

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
31,158
Reaction score
5,061
Points
1,130
Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
Use you head. Do you give away 1 million expecting NOTHING in return? The CGI is funded by foreign interests and you have no problem with that?
 

bullwinkle

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
5,446
Reaction score
757
Points
245
Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
So, what would be the reason for such a payment other than buying influence?
Well, maybe for the cause! It is said the Foundation does a lot of good around the world in terms of healthcare and education. I know the Clinton's have capitalized on their name and used it as leverage for their Foundation. And they know where the money is, know whom to hit up. That's an advantage for fund raisers. The difference between you and me is that I do not believe most of it went into their pockets, as is the common theme song among supporters of the pure and pristine Donald who wouldn't dream of deflecting charitable funds into his own ..ummm..portrait? The Clinton unhidden tax records shed some light. I believe they are available for your perusal too.
Yes they do....about 5% of the money went to anything charitable.....
I presume you have proof of that.
 

depotoo

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Messages
40,659
Reaction score
13,331
Points
2,280
If you will note in the email, the date is April 2012. One can only speculate, but Qatar had agreed to accept some gitmo detainees one month prior to this birthday donation. How much did State give them to accept these taliban?
Taliban prisoners at Guantanamo accept transfer to Qatar
Qatar, Brazil, Peru, Malawi, Rwanda - WikiLeaks



Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
 

owebo

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
18,638
Reaction score
2,010
Points
260
Location
Washigton, DC
Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
So, what would be the reason for such a payment other than buying influence?
Well, maybe for the cause! It is said the Foundation does a lot of good around the world in terms of healthcare and education. I know the Clinton's have capitalized on their name and used it as leverage for their Foundation. And they know where the money is, know whom to hit up. That's an advantage for fund raisers. The difference between you and me is that I do not believe most of it went into their pockets, as is the common theme song among supporters of the pure and pristine Donald who wouldn't dream of deflecting charitable funds into his own ..ummm..portrait? The Clinton unhidden tax records shed some light. I believe they are available for your perusal too.
Yes they do....about 5% of the money went to anything charitable.....
I presume you have proof of that.
The tax returns you mentioned...

Find a conservative willing to help you with the maths..,,:lol:
 

dannyboys

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2013
Messages
15,504
Reaction score
2,627
Points
280
Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
So, what would be the reason for such a payment other than buying influence?
Well, maybe for the cause! It is said the Foundation does a lot of good around the world in terms of healthcare and education. I know the Clinton's have capitalized on their name and used it as leverage for their Foundation. And they know where the money is, know whom to hit up. That's an advantage for fund raisers. The difference between you and me is that I do not believe most of it went into their pockets, as is the common theme song among supporters of the pure and pristine Donald who wouldn't dream of deflecting charitable funds into his own ..ummm..portrait? The Clinton unhidden tax records shed some light. I believe they are available for your perusal too.
Yes they do....about 5% of the money went to anything charitable.....
I presume you have proof of that.
No amount of proof will ever get you to remove your tongue from Hillary's asshole'.
This time the FBI has the Clinton Crime INC dead to rights.
It's irrelevant whether Hillary is elected President or not.
It's irrelevant whether Hillary is then impeached or not.
The Clinton legacy has been written by themselves and read by the American public.
There's never been a more despised political couple in American history.
They both have one foot in the grave.
Someday they'll both be dead no matter how much money they grifted.
That's good enough for me.
 

miketx

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
88,799
Reaction score
28,726
Points
2,290
Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
Lies noted.
 

bullwinkle

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
5,446
Reaction score
757
Points
245
Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
Use you head. Do you give away 1 million expecting NOTHING in return? The CGI is funded by foreign interests and you have no problem with that?
I guess that would depend on to whom you give the 1 million. If you give it to March of Dimes or St Jude or Shriner's Hospitals, I would presume you expect nothing in return except a tax credit. I believe there is an outfit called Charity Navigator that monitors charities. You could look up the Clinton Foundation. If I do it for you, you could always claim I found a biased site, but if you check it out it would be better. Nevermind posting a conclusion, just look to satisfy yourself.
 

Freewill

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
31,158
Reaction score
5,061
Points
1,130
Billy, as I read the link, I tried to figure your point. There was no 'cause/effect' that I could see. No 'Qatar gave X, and got X in return' link. Then, further on, I read this from the article: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said that major donors to the Clinton Foundation may have obtained favored access to Clinton's State Department, but has provided little evidence to that effect". Note the "may have" which becomes "sure did" in the minds of Trumpists.
So, what would be the reason for such a payment other than buying influence?
Well, maybe for the cause! It is said the Foundation does a lot of good around the world in terms of healthcare and education. I know the Clinton's have capitalized on their name and used it as leverage for their Foundation. And they know where the money is, know whom to hit up. That's an advantage for fund raisers. The difference between you and me is that I do not believe most of it went into their pockets, as is the common theme song among supporters of the pure and pristine Donald who wouldn't dream of deflecting charitable funds into his own ..ummm..portrait? The Clinton unhidden tax records shed some light. I believe they are available for your perusal too.
Yes they do....about 5% of the money went to anything charitable.....
I presume you have proof of that.
No amount of proof will ever get you to remove your tongue from Hillary's asshole'.
This time the FBI has the Clinton Crime INC dead to rights.
It's irrelevant whether Hillary is elected President or not.
It's irrelevant whether Hillary is then impeached or not.
The Clinton legacy has been written by themselves and read by the American public.
There's never been a more despised political couple in American history.
They both have one foot in the grave.
Someday they'll both be dead no matter how much money they grifted.
That's good enough for me.
While I agree with what you have posted you have done nothing but give the left more reason to love corrupt Hillary. The left loves nothing better than to force their will onto everyone else. Especially when their will is in the minority. How else can it be explained their stated distaste for war yet their support for the war hawk Hillary? It can't be except they love division and hate.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top