STAGED: Clinton sat to talk with three young Iowans at a coffee shop on Tuesday – all of whom were driven to the event by her Iowa campaign’s political director
thakavi • 9 minutes ago
There is nothing nasty, vile, or insulting that you can say about the Clintons that is not true. Hillary’s problem is that she lacks the charm and ‘aw shucks’ magic that her husband possesses. Bubba can get away with anything because he can talk the birds out of the trees – he didn’t get the name “Slick Willy” for nothing. But the trick is not transferable. He can’t talk her way out of trouble for her. The Hildebeast is nasty, vindictive, mean, and without moral scruple of any sort – and it shows through the micron-thin fatuous grin that she assumes in public. In the end she loses because eh more people see of her the less they trust her and the more she repels them. Her husband’s political machine will get her the nomination (there is no Magic Minority to derail her campaign this time), but she will be blown away in the general election. In the end, her only support will come from public sector unions, the feminazis, and the phairies.
Jerome Ogden • an hour ago
From “The Federalist,” March 2, 2015:
“Between 2009 and 2012, the Clinton Foundation raised over $500 million dollars according to a review of IRS documents by The Federalist (2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008). A measly 15 percent of that, or $75 million, went towards programmatic grants. More than $25 million went to fund travel expenses. Nearly $110 million went toward employee salaries and benefits. And a whopping $290 million during that period — nearly 60 percent of all money raised — was classified merely as “other expenses.”
A “charity” with only 15% actually going to charity would almost automatically be slapped with a cease-and-desist order by the IRS while it combed through the “charity’s” book. Geez, I wonder why that hasn’t happened with Clinton foundation.
Also, any guesses as to what those “other expenses” were? Anyone? Bueller?… Bueller?
This was Hillary Clinton’s main argument justifying the destruction of tens of thousands of e-mails from the account she used as secretary of state: She was selflessly serving the country, so Americans should trust and count on her judgment.
4:54 AM EDT [Edited]
The Democrat led Sunlight Foundation recently called the Clinton Global Initiative a “slush fund.” Behind the facade of charity, concern, and cliched initiatives is a bank vault for wealthy foreign donors to drop in their donation/bribes. Charity Navigator removed CGI from its list of charities justifying that it doesn’t resemble typical charity structure. What charity organizer asks for $500k speaking fee at a charity event? What charity organization asks for a $30k yearly fee? I want to see change in the White House and I don’t think Shillary Clinton is going to be changing anything! I will root for the next best democrat alternative when one steps up to the plate. The Clinton campaign machine is too icky.
Left to Hillary: You’re a Phony
And Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s fierce criticism of provisions favoring corporations has made it difficult for Hillary Rodham Clinton to embrace the pact in her White House bid — even though she touted it as secretary of state.
11:11 AM EDT
Chelsea just purchased a 10 million dollar home. Wow who knew charity work could be so lucrative!
11:12 AM EDT
Stop hating, if your daddy was smart enough to become president you too could enjoy those perks.
11:14 AM EDT
But they were broke when they left the WH…………
Clinton’s noises about policies to rebuild a middle class are a good start. Really rebuilding it, however, requires some radical change.
Hillary Clinton Wrong On Family’s Immigration History, Records Show
9 Reasons To Reject Hillary
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANNPublished on TheHillaryDaily.com on April 15, 2015
Here are nine reasons why electing Hillary Clinton as president would be a mistake.
1. She is a hawk who will get us into another war. Clinton is instinctively a hawk and is always very quick to urge the use of force. She backed involvement in Iraq, Syria and Libya. By temperament, she has a bias toward sharp, decisive action, is impatient with delay and terrified of appearing weak. She likes to be the tough guy.
2. She tends to follow certain advisers slavishly, almost to the exclusion of her own views. She has always had a guru to lead her. Bill Clinton is the standby. But, at various times in her life, Hillary Clinton has followed Webb Hubbell, Vince Foster, Mandy Grunwald, Ira Magaziner, Sandy Berger, Sidney Blumenthal, Mark Penn and others.
She doesn’t just take their advice, she adopts their method of thinking and becomes completely dependent on them. They become her brain. She will follow that person to the ends of the earth and only “wake up” when she is shocked by an event like the loss of Congress in 1994 or her defeat in 2008 to reconsider her devotion to the guru.
3. She has no knowledge of economics, nor much interest in it. Economics has always been Bill Clinton’s turf. The former first lady neither knows much about it nor cares much. She has avoided studying it and has no clear ideas or theories concerning it. She tends to feel that it is a technocratic function best left to the experts, a view common to those reared in the arrogance of the Keynesians of the ’60s and ’70s.
4. She has no deep sense of who she is. Hillary Clinton is endlessly adaptable. She can be anyone she has to be. Many politicians adopt protective coloration as a survival strategy. But Clinton does not just wear a disguise. She has no anchor, no real sense of who she really is.
5. Her worldview is shaped by her grudges. Nobody has a longer enemies list than Clinton, nor one kept so closely at hand. Slights are never forgotten and usually trigger a childish silent treatment as punishment. One can, for example, see her repeating President Obama’s behavior toward Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu — foreign policy by grudge.
6. Her fundraising has totally compromised her freedom of action. Nobody is as bound to the status quo as Clinton, tied down by millions of special-interest donations. Like Gulliver, these strings come from almost every industry in every country in the world.
Many candidates take office owing a lot to their donors. But this is different.
Bill and Hillary Clinton personally raised almost all the donations. They were in on the deal, gave the appropriate speeches, made the needed policy decisions and charmed the right people to get the money. So their involvement with donors is greater than if they had worked only through bundlers.
And much of the money went to them personally, not their foundation or committees, making them that much more indebted.
7. She is paranoid and suspicious. Presidential historian James David Barber defined presidents based, in part, on whether they enjoyed serving. Bill Clinton did. Hillary Clinton will not. Her sense of enemies closing in on her will overwhelm her. She will feel under siege, like Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and Herbert Hoover, making her dark, sullen, secretive and surly.
8. She approved NSA wiretapping of foreign leaders. As secretary of State, she had to be aware that the U.S. was wiretapping the cellphones of foreign leaders like Germany’s Angela Merkel. It is very hard to suppose that we would tap the phone of one of our key allies without the approval of the secretary of State.
9. Her contempt for the press is legendary and will lead to more and more secrets. Can anyone disagree with this?
Hillary Hates The Koch Brothers’ $$$ — Except When It Goes Into Her Own Bank Account!
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Published on TheHillaryDaily.com on April 24, 2015
According to the financial statement filed by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton gave a speech in San Antonio, Texas for $150,000 on May 19, 2010. Federal regulations require a disclosure of the “source” of honoraria paid to spouses.
Hillary listed the “source” of the money as Craig Michaels, Inc., an event planner. Apparently to her, the source means the entity that sent the check, not the entity that sponsored and paid for it. But here’s the thing: in Bill’s filing with the ethics watchdogs at the State Department, he indicated that one of the two sub-sponsors of the speech was Georgia Pacific Co.
But Hillary doesn’t want you to know that.
Because guess who owns that company? Koch Industries, owned by the Koch brothers.
Both Bill and Hillary have deplored the political influence and money spent by David and Charles Koch to elect Republicans.
But they don’t mind cashing the Koch checks and depositing them into their own joint bank account.
Ironically, just yesterday, Clinton campaign national press secretary Brian Fallon circulated a talking-points memo to Clinton allies with suggestions about how to attack the Peter Schweizer book Clinton Cash, which has started a tsunami of bad press for Hillary. (Forgive the understatement).
Fallon proposed that Clintonites blame the book on the Koch brothers: Spread the word, he said that: “The book was backed by a Koch Brothers-linked organization.”
Perhaps the 30-something Clinton mouthpiece doesn’t remember that the Koch brothers contributed $3,500 to Hillary’s Senate campaign coffers. She didn’t return that money.
Hillary and Bill have no problem taking speech money from the Koch Brothers — they just want to make sure that Hillary’s opponents don’t do the same.
And they want to make sure the fees to them stay top secret.