I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You think WSJ and Fox are running a story stating there are likely indictments coming related to the Foundation just for fun?

I think they are running it because people with political agendas are "leaking" it to them for political advantage.

I also think it's almost certainly bullshit, but we'll have to wait and see.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

No one said it isn't. They've said it was used to operate a pay to play scheme. A thing can effect noble and nefarious ends at once.

But you don't really care, do you?

Well, as soon as I see evidence I'd be happy to.

So far, the best evidence anyone has shown me tells me that John Podesta knows his Risotto.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Speak for yourself.

I guess we're all going to go one way or another.....

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

It's not the emails. Even the FBI admits that. It's what the emails disclose about the Foundation.

It's always been about the Foundation. The emails are just the shoehorn into the bigger investigation. Come on... you knew that.

The Foundation is such a nothingburger of a scandal. It has been looked at exhaustively, and no one has ever been able to find a situation where someone who "bought influence" through the Foundation -- which is to say, donated money that was mostly used to pay for AIDS treatment in the Third World -- got a quo for their quid. Many people have tried to write those stories, and they have found nothing. But because they don't want to admit that they wasted their time, or say nothing, and because the Clintons are the Clintons, the stories always end with the notion that there was the potential for the appearance of impropriety. No one ever writes the story that says, you know, for a long time the media has been looking at this smoke and saying, it could be a fire, but really there's no fire.

And, BTW, none of the coverage ever points out that the Foundation raised a ton of money and did good work with it. Most people don't know that.

ETA: And fuck Vox. That site has 0.0000000 credibility. It's like a high brow Huffington Post, or a left wing Townhall.

Not sure why you say this. Everything I've ever read on Vox has been solid, if sometimes earnest and dull. I don't really read Huffington Post, or Townhall, so not really sure I get your comparison.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

No one said it isn't. They've said it was used to operate a pay to play scheme. A thing can effect noble and nefarious ends at once.

It takes a lot of work to establish a well-functioning non-profit, and while your argument is logical correct, the fact that the people running the Clinton Foundation have done such a good job doing what they are ostensibly doing tends to suggest that they haven't been doing it for the ulterior motive of running a pay-to-play scheme.

An example consistent with this is the Trump Foundation, which obviously has been run for purposes other than doing good work, and hasn't managed to do good work.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

It has been looked at exhaustively, and no one has ever been able to find a situation where someone who "bought influence" through the Foundation

Come on now, Ty, there's no way she would have met with Mohammad Yunus without the massive quid pro quo!

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

No one said it isn't. They've said it was used to operate a pay to play scheme. A thing can effect noble and nefarious ends at once.

But you don't really care, do you?

This all reminds me of the Funkadelic tune, Philmore.

"Everybody's got a problem, but you don't even give a damn (you don't care, and you don't care)."

Way too empathetic for my taste but it is a hell of a banger of a funk tune. The Daily Dose:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gw6Yi7pCOcU

[notcasesensitive]

Sorry to be redundant (to those of you I'm friends with on facebook), but here's where I am today:

Other than reposting articles about sexism inherent in our treatment of Hillary Clinton, past and present (news flash: there's a lot of it), I've been hesitant to say too much about our election here, but this last week has filled me with dread and last night I finally pinpointed why this is so personal to me...

I am in the first generation of women who were raised to believe that with hard work and determination, we could grow up to be or do anything that we wanted. That my gender would not and should not hold me back. Thanks in large part to the feminist movement of the 1960's and early 1970's (and prior feminists who paved the way for that movement), my worldview has always been that women can and should do anything they set their minds to.

That cornerstone of my belief system will be rocked to its core if this eminently qualified woman who has fought her entire life to make things better for so many in this country and abroad (and frankly her record on that cannot and should not be disputed) is defeated on Tuesday by Donald Trump, an unqualified, narcissistic, unwilling-to-learn, hate-filled, bullying, reality tv con artist.

I don't think I'll really believe that story of my childhood any longer if Donald Trump is the president-elect of our country on Wednesday morning. And that is a heartbreaking realization.

So yes, this election is personal to me. And it's a big deal.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You think WSJ and Fox are running a story stating there are likely indictments coming related to the Foundation just for fun?

Just wanted to see this bit of brilliance again in light of recent events.

TM

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by notcasesensitive

Sorry to be redundant (to those of you I'm friends with on facebook), but here's where I am today:

Other than reposting articles about sexism inherent in our treatment of Hillary Clinton, past and present (news flash: there's a lot of it), I've been hesitant to say too much about our election here, but this last week has filled me with dread and last night I finally pinpointed why this is so personal to me...

I am in the first generation of women who were raised to believe that with hard work and determination, we could grow up to be or do anything that we wanted. That my gender would not and should not hold me back. Thanks in large part to the feminist movement of the 1960's and early 1970's (and prior feminists who paved the way for that movement), my worldview has always been that women can and should do anything they set their minds to.

That cornerstone of my belief system will be rocked to its core if this eminently qualified woman who has fought her entire life to make things better for so many in this country and abroad (and frankly her record on that cannot and should not be disputed) is defeated on Tuesday by Donald Trump, an unqualified, narcissistic, unwilling-to-learn, hate-filled, bullying, reality tv con artist.

I don't think I'll really believe that story of my childhood any longer if Donald Trump is the president-elect of our country on Wednesday morning. And that is a heartbreaking realization.

So yes, this election is personal to me. And it's a big deal.

Sebastian does not give a shit about your self-esteem issues.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Sebastian does not give a shit about your self-esteem issues.

As long as he's insulated from the possibility of any negative effects of a Trump presidency, I guess it's all good.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Just wanted to see this bit of brilliance again in light of recent events.

TM

That was quite ridiculous. Someone should lose a job for that.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Sebastian does not give a shit about your self-esteem issues.

Let me get this straight: Not voting for Trump is inadequate. I must vote for Hillary?

From what planet are you people?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by notcasesensitive

Sorry to be redundant (to those of you I'm friends with on facebook), but here's where I am today:

Other than reposting articles about sexism inherent in our treatment of Hillary Clinton, past and present (news flash: there's a lot of it), I've been hesitant to say too much about our election here, but this last week has filled me with dread and last night I finally pinpointed why this is so personal to me...

I am in the first generation of women who were raised to believe that with hard work and determination, we could grow up to be or do anything that we wanted. That my gender would not and should not hold me back. Thanks in large part to the feminist movement of the 1960's and early 1970's (and prior feminists who paved the way for that movement), my worldview has always been that women can and should do anything they set their minds to.

That cornerstone of my belief system will be rocked to its core if this eminently qualified woman who has fought her entire life to make things better for so many in this country and abroad (and frankly her record on that cannot and should not be disputed) is defeated on Tuesday by Donald Trump, an unqualified, narcissistic, unwilling-to-learn, hate-filled, bullying, reality tv con artist.

I don't think I'll really believe that story of my childhood any longer if Donald Trump is the president-elect of our country on Wednesday morning. And that is a heartbreaking realization.

So yes, this election is personal to me. And it's a big deal.

So now unless I vote for Hillary I'm aiding and abetting sexism and making women feel bad?

Did I have a similar obligation in 2008 because Obama was the first Black President?

This is heartfelt, but not a logical basis for me or anyone else to make a decision.

I dislike them both and she's going to win my state anyway. I'm not the enemy.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

The Foundation is such a nothingburger of a scandal. It has been looked at exhaustively, and no one has ever been able to find a situation where someone who "bought influence" through the Foundation -- which is to say, donated money that was mostly used to pay for AIDS treatment in the Third World -- got a quo for their quid. Many people have tried to write those stories, and they have found nothing. But because they don't want to admit that they wasted their time, or say nothing, and because the Clintons are the Clintons, the stories always end with the notion that there was the potential for the appearance of impropriety. No one ever writes the story that says, you know, for a long time the media has been looking at this smoke and saying, it could be a fire, but really there's no fire.

And, BTW, none of the coverage ever points out that the Foundation raised a ton of money and did good work with it. Most people don't know that.



Not sure why you say this. Everything I've ever read on Vox has been solid, if sometimes earnest and dull. I don't really read Huffington Post, or Townhall, so not really sure I get your comparison.

Neither you nor I can litigate the facts regarding the Foundation. There is new information. Maybe something; maybe nothing. That nothing stuck in the past does not prove the absence of something emerging.