Investigating the Clinton Foundation is likely to uncover actual dirt, the voter fraud thing is 100% hoax.

they did already and stopped because of lack of evidence. what changed?

Why would dirt be uncovered at the Clinton Foundation? It's got a higher rating than charities like the American Heart Association and American Cancer Society.

Do you think they are smuggling Uranium through their charity or something?

It's pretty likely people donate to clinton foundation and clinton acted in their best interest. Thats enough to appear like a controversy regardless of whether there is any shred of connection between those two things.

Lol

I'm actually surprised there was an investigation into the Clinton Foundation that overturned nothing, I find it highly implausible that an organization that does the kinds of things the foundation does is not engaged in criminal activity to some degree.

I will admit to not being incredibly knowledgeable here about the foundation specifically, but I know the Clintons really messed around in Haiti and gave out a bunch of contracts that benefited their buddies' multinational corporations. Whether this happened during the Clinton administration or with the Clinton foundation I'm not sure.

I think it's easy to forget that the Clintons are scum and in a better world would be in jail given the bold criminality of Trump & cro. Just because the conservatives' attacks on the Clintons are ludicrous and not based in reality does not mean there are not legitimate attacks on the Clintons.

You know that giving your buddies contracts isn't a crime, right?

Mr. Davis here is falling for the exact reason the rwnjs have founded their own "news" bubble: if they keep screaming loud enough and frequently enough that <random dem> is corrupt, well, pretty soon people will have heard enough garbage to believe that some of it must be true. I mean, why else would there be so much in the news about clinton corruption?

Loki, I am 100% certain I know more about this than you do because the mere word "Clinton" turns on your sycophantic anti-investigation, automated response machine. I'm pretty sure everyone just assumed I was talking about Uranium One or some dumb crap.

Great. I'll let Whitefish and Ryan Zinke know. Of course you may be right that no crime was committed, but if you think there are no misappropriation of nonprofit funds issues that potentially exist in the Clinton Foundation good for you.

Cool story. I lived in Haiti for four months.

Alright man, go for it. Dazzle us with a glowing, reputable citation so we can all talk about it.

Somewhat ironic of you to ask for a cite.

I'm pretty sure Politico is right up your alley right, that's where you get your news from?

https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...n-email-213110

No specific mention of corruption, just an internal memo from Chelsea Clinton (I'm sure if you crane your neck to the left you'll see her statue) about how crummy of a job they did.

No specifics here (it's not really my job to prove there is fire, just that there is enough smoke), but here's the right-wing source wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrup...iti_Fund_funds

General piece about Clinton in Haiti, mostly a desperate attempt at edifying you. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/05/h...uake-martelly/

And another about the Foundation generally: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/08/h...ion-president/

None of these sources lay out the case explicitly for corruption or crimes. My belief that crimes are committed is because I do not think organizations like this are ever not criminal and is based on my general observations of the Clintons, who are quite obviously sociopathic.

I could be wrong about this stuff. But being jumped on as if I'm coming from some right-wing position reflects more on you guys than it does me. There's no hope for true believer Loki, but I'm genuinely disappointed in Matty Lice.

Cool story, bro.

I'm totally not a crazy anti Clinton zealot like those other folks... But have you heard about the Clinton foundation? I've confirmed it is a criminal organization by thinking about it and confirming that it has to be because it can't not be.

Trump Foundation was mostly giving money to Donald Trump directly and we've already stopped giving a ****/forgotten about it.

Haiti is a rough case just in terms of them vs everybody else as it seems like pretty much every charity down there were total scams. Red Cross had a notable one that hit the press for a day or two before everybody stopped giving a **** like we always do.

fwiw, I don't see the Clintons as pure sociopaths. Sociopaths generally wouldn't bother giving a dime from the foundation to help anyone. Sure, Hillary is probably a narcissist and Bill has the same views on women as Trump does but I'm not quite buying this one. Corrupt? Probably.

It's tougher to justify simply because there's far worse getting away with it that we're fully aware and most foundations are run like that in terms of high salaries going to pals and all that crap and nobody seems to give a ****. The biggest problem simply, it seems obviously political like everything else.

I actually came across that article, among the dozens of other Hillary/Haiti conspiracy garbage dumps being refuted.

That goalpost sure got moved quickly from "THEY DID THE ILLEGAL STUFF" to "Uh, Chelsea said they could have done a better job".

Good effort man.

You too. Way to read the one article I posted that's within your wheelhouse. You did an excellent job of reading over the Jacobin articles which detail the experiences of Haitians. Also note that I did not post any of the garbage dumps which, yes, are plentiful. Again, the existence of crap and impure motives and right-wing propaganda does not exonerate the Clinton Foundation!

I said "likely." And it's pretty obvious that my position is that the Clintons are scum and that organizations such as the Clinton Foundation are almost always involved in criminal behavior. I might be wrong about this, but I was never required to provide absolute proof of corruption.

I had no idea there were so many defenders of the Clinton Foundation here. Do you guys generally trust giant charitable organizations that participate in restructuring countries after disasters? Do you not think it's likely that any similar charitable organization is engaged in criminal activity? Like if you had to bet, is the Clinton Foundation guilty of criminal activity, you would bet no? (For Loki: "Likely" means greater than 50%.)

To Bill's credit he admits to ****ing up Haiti.

So you post 5 articles and then say

None say anything about corruption.

In your cite for - there’s corruption


Got it.

It's not my fault you guys are either sycophants or incredibly bad at recognizing the preconditions for corruption.

From the second Jacobin article above:

Does this stuff warrant an investigation of the organization or not? My original post was a one off that said there was dirt on the Clinton admin as compared to the utterly fraudulent voter fraud committee. You guys don't think any of this qualifies as dirt?

I'm reading the Wolff book and I'll try to just enjoy you guys posting about that instead of reflexively dropping groupthink.

Oh **** yeah, the Clinton foundation song and dance. I always forget the second verse somehow? You know, the part where the Clintons took a bunch of money from the foundation for their personal use. How much did Bill and Hillary make from that scam anyway?

Sigh. I don't think the Clintons took any money personally out of the foundation itself. No corruption then!

Sigh, I have much love for you too. Oh well.

The dude seriously said offering contracts to people you like is not corruption. Which is a ridiculous statement.

I responded with a very clear example of corruption. It's such an obvious form of corruption that it beggars belief that someone would defend this as non-corruption in other contexts (like when their heroes perhaps engage in the behavior.)

I'll try one more time: By making a reference to corruption in the Trump administration, I am pointing out the hypocrisy of those making ridiculous arguments against me. If I posted about Whitefish and Zinke, nobody here would be saying, lol dude that's not corruption that's just contracts.

Seriously, I'm reading this trump book and in the first few pages it talks about how Manafort didn't take a salary which made people wonder what he was getting out of it. How exactly is this not line of thought not applied to the Clinton Foundation?