Hillary buys the New York Slimes' endorsement for $100K

[Clipper Nation]

A little-known private foundation controlled by Bill and Hillary Clinton donated $100,000 to the New York Times’ charitable fund in 2008, the same year the newspaper’s editorial page endorsed Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary, according to tax documents reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon.

The Clinton Family Foundation, a separate entity from the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, has been the family’s vehicle for personal charitable giving since 2001.

It is funded directly by the Clintons and distributes more than $1 million a year to civic and educational causes.

The New York Times Neediest Cases Fund is a charity affiliated with the newspaper that assists underprivileged New Yorkers. It is run by members of the New York Times Company’s board of directors and senior executives.

The Times’ editorial board endorsed Clinton against Democratic challengers John Edwards and Barack Obama on January 25, 2008, writing that she was “more qualified, right now, to be president.”

At the time, there were reports (http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/split-decision) that the Times board had leaned toward endorsing Obama, but was overruled by then-chairman and publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr., whose family controlled the paper. Sulzberger’s cousins and Times Company directors, Lynn Dolnick and Michael Golden, chaired the New York Times Neediest Cases Fund in 2008.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/clinton-donated-100k-to-new-york-times-group-the-same-year-paper-endorsed-her/

[pgardn]

All her back deals with big donors is so Republican.

She is seriously out sliming the slimy, it's amazing.

[Clipper Nation]

All her back deals with big donors is so Republican.

She is seriously out sliming the slimy, it's amazing.
Let's not pretend like Red Team and Blue Team are actually different on anything deeper than the most superficial level.

[boutons_deux]

politics is corrupted by money, esp by Repug Citizens-United and Repug ? I'm shocked, shocked that Hillary would be singled out. Just shocked!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/12/09/spending-deal-would-allow-wealthy-donors-to-dramatically-increase-giving-to-national-parties/

[Nbadan]

the Washington Free Beacon.


:lol

[Nbadan]

Other headlines from the washington beacon...

http://stashpit.com/upload/big/2014/04/03/533da370739f5.jpg

[Nbadan]

http://www.presidentialufo.com/old_site/Clinton_alien.jpg

[Nbadan]

and my favorite...

http://www.globemagazine.com/sites/globemagazine.com/files/GL23C1A_2015.jpg

[boutons_deux]

Repugs FABRICATING shit, scandals, slime about Hillary. They've been doing for 25 years. It's what you do when you have NO POLICIES, no solutions to anything.

[pgardn]

Let's not pretend like Red Team and Blue Team are actually different on anything deeper than the most superficial level.

One team clearly had most of the big donors. Not so much anymore.

[pgardn]

and my favorite...



I thought your favorite was the 9/11 crap?
So who was behind it all again? Bush? I can't remember the latest.

[Clipper Nation]

Repugs FABRICATING shit, scandals, slime about Hillary. They've been doing for 25 years. It's what you do when you have NO POLICIES, no solutions to anything.
Proof that those tax documents are fake?

[boutons_deux]

Proof that those tax documents are fake?

Repugs FABRICATING shit, scandals, slime about Hillary. They've been doing for 25 years. It's what you do when you have NO POLICIES, no solutions to anything.

Prove Repugs aren't fucking America as paid to do by the VRWC?

[boutons_deux]

Clinton Foundation ‘Scandals’ Are Made Of Smoke And Innuendo

First, no Secretary of State prior to Hillary Clinton had ever used a government email address or preserved their messages for posterity. And why should they? The law requiring cabinet members to do so didn’t go into effect until after Clinton left office.

Bush administration Secretary of State Colin Powell deleted his emails. Every single one. Condoleezza Rice has said that she simply never used email, which may even be true.

Second, as of 2011 former president George W. Bush had earned at least $15 million giving speeches mainly to corporate and Republican groups. Politico (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/on-talk-circuit-george-bush-makes-millions-but-few-waves-118697.html#ixzz3cUQnkHbj) has found more recent information hard to find. It’s private and confidential.

In 2011, Bush pocketed $100,000 to speak at a fundraiser for a homeless shelter in McKinney, Texas. The shelter’s director called the event a success, adding that the former president was his usual charming self. Bush’s standard practice is that reporters aren’t invited and recording devices are not allowed.

“Relative to the Clintons, though,” Politico notes “he’s attracted considerably less attention.” Maybe that’s because George W. Bush has no close relatives running for president (http://www.nationalmemo.com/tag/jeb-bush/). So that when he accepts $250,000 for speaking to the Republican Jewish Coalition in Las Vegas, it’s not an issue. This event is widely known as the “Sheldon Adelson Primary,” after the billionaire casino magnate who openly auditions GOP hopefuls who oppose online gambling and support Israel.

Anyway, aren’t they all up for sale, the candidates? Clintons, Bushes, Walkers, Cruzes, Perrys, the lot.

Open for business, every single one.

Somehow, however, what would appear the least objectionable buck raking by a presidential candidate during the 2016 campaign cycle has become the most controversial. I refer, of course, to the Clinton Foundation, Hillary and Bill Clinton’s $2 billion charitable enterprise.

The Clinton Foundation is credited, among other things, with providing cut-rate HIV drugs to patients throughout the Third World, hearing aids for deaf children in Botswana, and earthquake relief in Haiti; the foundation even fights elephant poaching in Africa — reportedly a passion of Chelsea and Hillary Clinton’s. (And of every other decent human being on Earth.)

Interestingly, the Washington Post’s David A. Fahrenthold recently produced a remarkably fair, snark-free account (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-inside-story-of-how-the-clintons-built-a-2-billion-global-empire/2015/06/02/b6eab638-0957-11e5-a7ad-b430fc1d3f5c_story.html) of the Clinton Foundation and its proprietor, a veritable force of nature. Despite being a longtime acquaintance of his, like thousands of Arkansans I almost can’t comprehend the life Bill Clinton has chosen. His life of endless banquets, celebrity galas, and international jetting around would make me crazy.

Meanwhile, the thing to understand about the swirl of innuendo and accusation concerning this remarkable enterprise is that it’s yet another “Swift Boat”-style operation.

Written by a career political operative named Peter Schweizer, :lol :lol the book Clinton Cash (http://www.nationalmemo.com/tag/clinton-cash/) amounts to little more than a conspiracy theory touted by the same newspapers that promoted the Whitewater hoax and cheered on Kenneth Starr and his leak-o-matic prosecutors.

Aptly described by Michael Tomasky in the New York Review of Books (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2015/jun/25/hillary-our-future/) as an “imitation of journalism,” Clinton Cash basically assembles circumstantial evidence about various potentates and high flyers in the Clintons’ orbit. Assuming venal motives, it then leaps to conclusions unsupported by fact. In most instances, the author hasn’t even interviewed his targets.

After making a promotional deal with Schweizer, The New York Times devoted 4,400 words to a jumbled narrative (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html) involving a Canadian mining executive who’d pledged half his income to the Clinton Foundation and the subsequent sale of a Wyoming uranium mine to Russian interests.

Way down at the bottom, however, the determined reader learned that Secretary of State Clinton played no role in the deal whatsoever. At least none that the Times could find. It’s pure supposition.

The newspaper then remained silent (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/05/08/clinton-cashs-peter-schweizer-pushes-stat-that/203580) as Schweizer appeared on conservative talk shows depicting the foundation as a giant slush fund devoting only 10 percent of its budget to charity. In fact, according to the American Institute of Philanthropy, the real number is 89 percent — an A rating.

Look, any cynic can play at this. Check out your hometown society page. That doctor’s wife at the Heart Fund gala: Is it about charity, or about people back home in Turkey Scratch seeing her socializing with a Walmart heiress? How about the architect? Does he care about sick kids, or is he about getting the contract for the new hospital wing named for the heiress?

Does Bill Clinton do all this for humanity, or does he just need more attention and admiration than us “normal” people? Does Hillary want to be president for America’s sake, or for her own?

The correct answer is all of the above.

But when journalists cry corruption, make them prove it.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/clinton-foundation-scandals-are-made-of-smoke-and-innuendo/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_term=MM_frequency_six&utm_campaign=Morning%20Memo%20-%202015-06-10&utm_content=Final

[Wild Cobra]

A little-known private foundation controlled by Bill and Hillary Clinton donated $100,000 to the New York Times’ charitable fund in 2008, the same year the newspaper’s editorial page endorsed Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary, according to tax documents reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon.

The Clinton Family Foundation, a separate entity from the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, has been the family’s vehicle for personal charitable giving since 2001.

It is funded directly by the Clintons and distributes more than $1 million a year to civic and educational causes.

The New York Times Neediest Cases Fund is a charity affiliated with the newspaper that assists underprivileged New Yorkers. It is run by members of the New York Times Company’s board of directors and senior executives.

The Times’ editorial board endorsed Clinton against Democratic challengers John Edwards and Barack Obama on January 25, 2008, writing that she was “more qualified, right now, to be president.”

At the time, there were reports (http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/split-decision) that the Times board had leaned toward endorsing Obama, but was overruled by then-chairman and publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr., whose family controlled the paper. Sulzberger’s cousins and Times Company directors, Lynn Dolnick and Michael Golden, chaired the New York Times Neediest Cases Fund in 2008.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/clinton-donated-100k-to-new-york-times-group-the-same-year-paper-endorsed-her/

Is there really anything to see here?

Hillary was the most qualified of the three!

[Clipper Nation]

Repugs FABRICATING shit, scandals, slime about Hillary. They've been doing for 25 years. It's what you do when you have NO POLICIES, no solutions to anything.

Prove Repugs aren't fucking America as paid to do by the VRWC?



So in other words, you have no proof that the tax documents are fake? Thanks for admitting that Hillary is a corrupt sleazeball.