Tag Archives: political parties

Those Clinton Foundation Donations

Posted on by
Reply

On the matter of the Clinton Foundation’s need to refile some past tax reporting records because others had discovered that the Foundation had underreported its income, the Foundation’s Acting CEO Maura Pally offered this:

We made mistakes, as many organizations of our size do, but we are acting quickly to remedy them. And [we] have taken steps to ensure they don’t happen in the future.

Fair enough. Based solely on this instance of underreporting, it’s difficult to lay the error off to corruption or incompetence, even though the erroneous underreporting is a massive error, and the underreported donations occurred while Hillary Clinton was sitting in the Secretary of State’s chair.

But then Pally added this:

the group has already announced that it will accept funding from only a “handful of governments….”

Thus, in addition to giving the appearance, if as yet undemonstrated fact, that the Secretary of State’s influence was…available…Clinton, through Pally, is giving the impression that the President’s chair will be similarly available to selected foreign governments, should she be elected.

The woman is either oblivious, and so incompetent, or she’s a corrupt politician, and so unfit.

Hmm….

Get Off My Lawn

Posted on by
Reply

The union looking to organize workers at Boeing’s South Carolina plant has put its plans in a holding pattern, claiming workers are so opposed to signing up that they chased labor leaders off their porches at gunpoint.

Poor babies. That’s private property you’re trespassing on. Get off. Stay off until you have the owner’s permission. How is that so hard to understand? Even by a union hack.

More importantly, though: how did those union hacks get these workers’ home addresses? Who gave up that private information without the workers’ permission?

It also appears the union is making all of this up. The police say they’ve received no reports of any such behavior either in North Charleston, the location of the plant, or in the surrounding areas.

The hacks did go crying to their momma though.

The union filed an unfair labor practice with the National Labor Relations Board in which it alleged that “two organizers were threatened at gunpoint and others reported hostile and near-violent confrontations,” according to a union press release.

It’ll be interesting to see President Barack Obama’s NLRB make the case that ejecting trespassers from private property is somehow unfair.

Hillary Clinton’s “Reset”

Posted on by
Reply

From Thursday’s The New York Times comes this lurid tale of money and women.

Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale [to Rosatom of a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West] gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by…Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

2009-2013, you’ll recall, was Hillary Clinton’s term as Secretary of State.

There’s this additional money:

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr Clinton received $500,000 [that pay disparity, again] for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

Clinton’s response to this? Here it is, through her National Press Secretary, Brian Fallon:

[No one] has ever produced a shred of evidence supporting the theory that Hillary Clinton ever took action as secretary of state to support the interests of donors to the Clinton Foundation.

Notice that. She didn’t deny the NYT‘s reporting, she wholly ignored the question of her involvement in the turning over of American uranium mines to Russia, instead all she had was a “You got nothin’ on me, copper.”

Clinton’s “Reset” button for Russia actually translates from the Russian as “overcharged.”

She’s overcharged for, indeed. For Americans. Cheap, though, for Russia.

But we–and she–are just haggling over her price.

Wages

Posted on by
2

Democratic Party Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has been making a big deal about what she claims is the outrageous pay of company CEOs compared to their employees. Here’s a graph, via AEIdeas‘ Carpe Diem and Mark Perry that indicates how well she’s walking that talk.ClintonWage

Or is this fact just another of campaign season distraction and attack from the Hillary Truth?

Hmm….

Then Get Out Of The Way

Posted on by
1

President Barack Obama had some choice words about the Loretta Lynch nomination at a press conference with Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi.

What are we doing here? I have to say, there are times where the dysfunction in the Senate just goes too far. This is an example of it. It’s gone too far. Enough. Enough. … This is embarrassing, a process like this.

It is enough, Mr Obama, and it is embarrassing. When are you going to get your Senate Democrats out of the way and allow a vote on the anti-human tracking bill that your fellow Democrats are holding up? Your fellow Democrats are cynically blocking the bill because they demand that Federal tax dollars be available to pay for abortions, and the bill continues a decades-long prohibition against that misuse of Americans’ money. Your fellow Democrats would rather allow human trafficking to continue apace than not have public funds available for abortions.

It’s also a bill that those same Democrats of yours knew when they voted affirmatively to pass it out of committee onto the Senate floor contained that prohibition.

As soon as your Democrats allow a vote on that bill, the Lynch confirmation will come up.

Get off the dime, Mr Obama.