The Clinton Foundation – warts and all

  Hillary-Clinton-Foundation

"Most notable among these files is the file called “Clinton Foundation Vulnerabilities Master Doc FINAL” which, as the title implies, is an extensive 42-page summary of how the Clinton Foundation views its biggest vulnerabilities based on mentions, references and attacks from the press.

Here are some of the section titles:

  • THE CLINTON FOUNDATION RECEIVED DONATIONS FROM INDIVIDUALS TIED TO SAUDI ARABIA WHILE CLINTON SERVED AS SECRETARY OF STATE
  • AN EMBATTLED BUSINESSMAN WITH “TIES TO BAHRAIN’S STATE-OWNED ALUMINUM COMPANY” GAVE BETWEEN $1 MILLION AND $5 MILLION TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION
  • A VENEZUELAN MEDIA MOGUL WHO WAS ACTIVE IN VENEZUELAN POLITICS DONATED TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION DURING CLINTON’S TENURE AS SECRETARY OF STATE
  • GERMAN INVESTOR WHO HAS LOBBIED CHANCELLOR MERKEL’S ADMINISTRATION GAVE BETWEEN $1 MILLION AND $5 MILLION TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION, SOME OF WHICH WAS DURING MRS. CLINTON’S TENURE AT THE STATE DEPARTMENT
  • THE CEO OF AN AMSTERDAM BASED ENERGY COMPANY DONATED AT LEAST $1 MILLION TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION AND LATER ANNOUNCED AT THE 2009 CGI MEETING A $5 BILLION PROJECT TO DEVELOP ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY POWER GENERATION IN INDIA AND CHINA
  • INDIAN POLITICIAN AMAR SINGH, WHO HAD DONATED AT LEAST $1 MILLION TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION, MET WITH HILLARY CLINTON IN SEPTEMBER 2008 TO DISCUSS AN INDIA-U.S. CIVIL NUCLEAR AGREEMENT
  • THE CLINTON FOUNDATION RECEIVED ADDITIONAL DONATIONS FROM INDIAN BUSINESS INTERESTS PRIOR TO HER BECOMING SECRETARY OF STATE
  • BILLIONAIRE STEEL EXECUTIVE AND MEMBER OF THE FOREIGN INVESTMENT COUNCIL IN KAZAKHSTAN LAKSHMI MITTAL GAVE $1 MILLION TO $5 MILLION TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION BEFORE CLINTON BECAME SECRETARY OF STATE
  • SOON AFTER SECRETARY CLINTON LEFT THE STATE DEPARTMENT, THE CLINTON
    FOUNDATION “RECEIVED A LARGE DONATION FROM A CONGLOMERATE RUN BY A
    MEMBER OF CHINA’S NATIONAL PEOPLE’S CONGRESS”
  • …AND THE CLINTON FOUNDATION DEFENDED ITS PARTNERSHIPS WITH BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC CORPORATE INTERESTS
  • POWERFUL AND CONTROVERSIAL CORPORATE INTERESTS BASED IN THE U.S. ALSO DONATED TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION
  • AMONG THE CLINTON FOUNDATION DONORS REVEALED IN 2009 WERE SEVERAL FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS WHO HAD GIVEN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
  • WHEN HILLARY CLINTON BECAME SECRETARY OF STATE IN 2009, BILL CLINTON AGREED TO STOP ACCEPTING CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION FROM MOST FOREIGN COUNTRIES
  • IN THE PAST, SOME OBSERVERS HAD LINKED FOREIGN GOVERNMENT DONATIONS TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION AND SECRETARY CLINTON’S WORK AT THE STATE DEPARTMENT
  • THE CLINTON FOUNDATION CAME UNDER INTENSE SCRUTINY IN FEBRUARY 2015 WHEN IT WAS REVEALED THAT THE FOUNDATION HAD ACCEPTED DONATIONS FROM FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS AFTER SECRETARY CLINTON LEFT THE STATE DEPARTMENT
  • THE WALL STREET JOURNAL TIED FOREIGN GOVERNMENT DONORS TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION’S ENDOWMENT FUNDRAISING UNDER SECRETARY CLINTON
  • CLINTON FOUNDATION ANNOUNCED THAT SHOULD HILLARY CLINTON DECIDE TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT, THE FOUNDATION WOULD FOLLOW APPROPRIATE PROCEDURES FOR ACCEPTING DONATIONS FROM FOREIGN DONATIONS, JUST LIKE IT HAD HAD UNDER SECRETARY CLINTON…
  • REPORTS THAT STATE DEPARTMENT LAWYERS DID NOT EXHAUSTIVELY VET BILL CLINTON’S PAID SPEECHES DURING SECRETARY CLINTON’S TENURE RAISED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ROLE CLINTON FOUNDATION DONATIONS MAY HAVE PLAYED IN ORGANIZING THOSE SPEECHES
  • SOME CONSERVATIVES USED THE FOREIGN DONATIONS CONTROVERSY TO IMPLY THAT THE CLINTON FOUNDATION IS NOT A CHARITY AND QUESTION THE FOUNDATION’S CHARITABLE WORK
  • THE CLINTON FOUNDATION HAS ACCEPTED DONATIONS FROM INDIVIDUALS, SOME OF WHOM HAD TIES TO FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS, DURING HER TENURE AS SECRETARY OF STATE
  • THE CLINTON FOUNDATION RECEIVED MONEY FROM A FOUNDATION FORMED BY FORMER UKRAINIAN PARLIAMENT MEMBER VICTOR PINCHUK
  • WALL STREET JOURNAL COLUMNIST MARY O’GRADY CITED A CONTRACT BETWEEN TWO CLINTON DONORS FOR HAITI AID AS EVIDENCE OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR THE CLINTONS

There is much more in the full document presented below (link)."  Hang the bankers 

http://www.hangthebankers.com/clinton-foundation-hacked-documents/

******

"HOW DOES THE CLINTON GIUSTRA ENTERPRISE PARTNERSHIP (CANADA) WORK WITH THE CLINTON FOUNDATION?

The Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (Canada) does not provide general operating support to the Clinton Foundation, but rather we contract with the Clinton Foundation to execute specific programs and we provide ongoing instruction on the use of our resources, holding the Clinton Foundation accountable for reaching established philanthropic goals that help further our charitable purpose(s).

The Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (Canada) contracts with the Clinton Foundation to carry out this work based on the Clinton Foundation’s capacity, resources, specialized skill sets, knowledge, as well as established networks needed to successfully execute economic development activities in sometimes challenging environments.

ARE THE NAMES OF ALL THE CANADIAN DONORS THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE CLINTON GIUSTRA ENTERPRISE PARTNERSHIP (CANADA) PUBLIC INFORMATION? 

No. Under Canadian laws and charitable best practices, charitable donors have a right to privacy. When a donor gives money to a Canadian charity in confidence, and in the process provides his or her personal information, under Canadian law a fiduciary relationship is established between the Canadian charity and the donor concerning the use of private information that the donor has provided. To maintain the fiduciary relationship between Canadian donors and the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (Canada) with regard to disclosure of donor information, prior consent must be first obtained from each and every Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (Canada) donor agreeing to disclose their donor information to any other person or organization."  Posted FAQs of the CGE partnership 

http://cgepartnership.com/media/faqs/

————–

 Well, pilgrims.   It seems that the Clinton Foundation is an exotic bird.

The first section above is from the DNC's file concerning Hillary's political liabilities.  This was hacked by Guccifer 2, a Romanian recently appeared on the scene.  God knows what or whom he really is.

The second quote is from the posted explanations (FAQs) of a Canadian charity that is welded at the hip to the Clinton Foundation (USA) through "contracts.  Under Canadian law donors to a CANADIAN charity have an absolure right to "privacy" unless they individually consent to public disclosure of their particulars.  The donations are tax deductible as is he Canadian foundation itself.  Once "contract" moneys for charitable purposes cross the border into the hands of the Clinton Foundation USA they are also tax free and need only be described in US tax reporting as coming from the Canadian Foundation.

As an old spook I have a hard time imagining a smoother way to launder money.  If one were doing that - 1. The money would go to a Canadian donor.  2. The Canadian would make a privacy protected contribution to the Canadian charity.  3.  A benevolent contract would transfer the tax free money to the US foundation.  4.  After that …

None of this really requires much commentary on my part.  pl

This entry was posted in As The Borg Turns, Current Affairs, Justice, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

94 Responses to The Clinton Foundation – warts and all

  1. Avatar pj says:

    “FBI ‘REVOLT OF WATERGATE PROPORTIONS’ IF HILLARY SKATES”
    http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/fbi-revolt-of-watergate-proportions-if-hillary-skates/#!

  2. Avatar Edward says:

    I have a hard time imagining a legitimate reason a charity might want an arrangement like this. What other charities are set up this way?

  3. Avatar Dubhaltach says:

    Would a prosecutor be able to invoke the RICO legislation?

  4. Avatar Harry says:

    Can’t get the help these days

  5. Avatar Bobo says:

    This answers a lot of questions as to what is taking the Justice Depatment so long in either bringing charges or not regarding the E-Mail issue as this indicates that HRC is being looked at for Political Corruption & more. For the DNC to have all these points
    on file ready to refute, questions the ethical actions of that organization.
    Looks like Slick Willie & Crooked Hillary may have to do some time in the Pokey while letting, old Buddy, Donald get the Big House, the white one I mean.

  6. Avatar Nancy K says:

    Interesting post indeed. I’m still voting for her warts and all because I cannot even imagine Trump as president.

  7. Avatar turcopolier says:

    Nancy K
    Cling to that thought. I do not know whom, if anyone, I might vote for for president since Webb chose to sulk in his tent before the walls of Troy pl

  8. Avatar turcopolier says:

    Harry
    Yes. Some of my ancestors might have said, “Who are these wretches?” pl

  9. Avatar turcopolier says:

    Dubhaltach
    Perhaps a state prosecutor, certainly not a federal one. pl

  10. Avatar Walter Jeffers says:

    “I cannot even imgaine” – a true symptom of social justice warrior. Vote for HRC and you get demographic change on a scale not even seen under BO. Massive amnesty that signal the death knell of the America as we know it. But hey, a lot of democrats can get elected since the amnestied illegal love big government and free handouts.
    HRC is not acceptable to a rational person.

  11. Avatar BabelFish says:

    Seriously contemplating the Libertarian Party. Never thought I would ever write those words.

  12. Avatar Dubhaltach says:

    In reply to turcopoliern 23 June 2016 at 02:05 PM
    Thank you, now I need to go away and do some research to find out why only state prosecutors would do so. I thought RICO was for federal prosecutors only – plainly I was wrong about that.

  13. Avatar Joe100 says:

    All –
    An earlier post comment cited very detailed analysis work on Clinton Foundation as a “charity fraud” by Charles Ortel at http://charlesortel.com
    This is the most thorough work I have seen to date and it appears quite credible.
    I have felt for some time that potential HRC “pay for play” situations while she was SOS are more likely to “stick” with the public and take her down than the email criminality, as it is much easier for most to understand financial corruption in public service.

  14. Avatar turcopolier says:

    Typepad HTML Email
    Federal prosecutors work for the president. Several states have own RICO laws. Pl
     

  15. Avatar Tyler says:

    Clinton News Network trying to spin Trump bringing up Clinton Cash so hard its about to get its own gravitational force.

  16. Fred Fred says:

    I wonder if any of the courageous members of the press will be asking the Prime Minister about the “Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (Canada)”.
    http://cgepartnership.com/who-we-are/founder-executive/?founder=1162
    “Frank Giustra is CEO of Fiore Group of Companies, a private firm managing a broad portfolio of private equity investments…”
    That wouldn’t be a hedge fund now would it? Maybe just a bank bailed out by Barrack in 2008?
    “The Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (Canada)… Since 2007, the work of the Canadian charity has been carried out under an Agency Agreement with the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation (the Clinton Foundation).”
    Oh look, Chelsea’s in there too. Doesn’t her spouse run a hedge fund that lost more money than Donald Trump?

  17. While it may have tax exempt status at all levels in fact IMO no federal agency regulates private charitable foundations thus self-dealing rampant.

  18. Avatar Tony says:

    The sad part is that we know how crooked Clintons are, but she may (with a high probability) be elected as the next president.

  19. Avatar Haralambos says:

    Col. Lang,
    I supported Webb and would have gladly voted for him, but Achilles, I think he is not. I would opt for Philoctetes. There are many lessons to be learned in Sophocles’ play of that name involving the methods of persuasion: force, fraud and logical appeals, Aristotle’s three. Ultimately, the aging Philoctetes is persuaded by example in a deus ex machina by Hercules. You will know this better than I, I imagine, but I think paradeigmata of virtue (in the ancient sense of virtue) are what many folks are looking and hoping for, but, unfortunately, there are none on offer.

  20. Avatar JohnH says:

    If you don’t live in a battleground state, you can vote third party without affecting the result, since the outcome is already virtually certain in all but about a dozen states–they are reliably Democratic or Republican.
    Voting third party sends a message of disenchantment with the two party duopoly. Not voting is interpreted as apathy.
    If enough people voted third party, the two parties would have to stop taking voters for granted.
    BTW I am NOT advocating any third party. Voting third party is what is important here.

  21. Avatar Edward says:

    Is there still a special prosecutor law? This seems like a case for a special prosecutor. If H.C. is forced out of the presidential race how will the democrats choose a replacement?

  22. Avatar JohnH says:

    The questions that beg answers: “Given all the foundations in the world with established track records, what would motivate donors to suddenly hand out enormous sums of money to the Clinton Foundation? Is their work especially unique or expert? If so, how so? Or is the sudden largess due to some tacit or covert quid pro quo?”
    After reviewing the Clinton Foundation’s initiatives, I don’t see that they are doing anything that others were not already doing.

  23. Avatar Keith Harbaugh says:

    I am certainly no fan of the Clintons or much of what they stand for,
    but all the asserted leaks of supposed emails and files makes me wonder:
    What gives these leaks any credibility whatsoever?
    Why should we not think anything from, say, “Guccifer2”
    is a total fabrication by, say, some organization working for Putin?
    It would not be the first time disinformation has been spread by such parties.
    Is that not so, Colonel?
    But that said, thank you very much for your post and your comments,
    especially your observations on the way the Clintons have carefully arranged things
    to make the money flow into their clutches so untraceable.
    Too bad Eliot Spitzer didn’t have their wiles!

  24. Avatar Kooshy says:

    Sorry, if you really think this is the reason for the DOJ not to bring charges, or requesting for an independent fact finding commission, then you must like the island I have for sale in Manhattan. Common now, I bet no one be allowed to touch the Borg’ favorite couple. What we are seeing is just a good day for cleaning some old dirty cloths, since it’s not getting to any MSM.

  25. Avatar Kooshy says:

    I watched their (LIbers) interview on CNN yesterday, and afterwords thought in same way.

  26. Avatar J says:

    Colonel,
    “Teflon” Hillary (and Bill) once again? Or will something eventually stick?

  27. Avatar Harry says:

    Curious. I consider myself quite left of center and while I dont have a vote in this country but if I did I would cut off my hand sooner than vote for her. Mrs. Clinton demonstrates a fine understanding of the principle of offside in soccer. She remains to the right of all Democrats and keeps her eyes closely peeled on the left most leaning republican; she keeps herself level which whoever that maybe.
    Sadly I can imagine both as president. But in one case I see someone who appears to be an idiot but who was smart enough to say the right thing to the American people. The other case has caused death and destruction all over the mid east with an appetite for more, and appears to be a rackeeter and criminal. For those with better memories, I take the view that anyone as good as her at futures trading is wasted in politics.
    I pray for a Trump victory.

  28. Avatar different clue says:

    Nancy K,
    I find Clinton more dangerous and threatening in certain areas and Trump more dangerous and threatening in certain other areas. If one of the candidates ends up truly scaring me and the other one doesn’t, I will likely vote for the non-scary one. If both remain equally scary, I will write in Sanders. And/or if it looks like one is going to win so massively that my vote won’t “count” in a one vs the other sense, I will feel free to write in Sanders yet again.
    Disappointed and embittered Sanderists may well all decide to write Sanders in and try forcing the System to acknowledge our existence no matter how it affects the vote totals for the other ones.

  29. Avatar walrus says:

    Now you know why Hilary and her backers want to disarm American citizens…

  30. Avatar Harry says:

    Bless the staff of the FBI for trying to do their job. Forgive me for thinking that their “superiors” are doing their best to rest their fingers on the scales. I dont think they care that we are watching them.
    Shameless.

  31. Avatar turcopolier says:

    Harry
    We can only hope that Martin Dempsey was not the only Irish Catholic who followed his conscience. we will see what Comey is made of. pl

  32. Avatar Jack says:

    Nancy
    Have you ever voted for anyone not a Democrat for President?

  33. Avatar Castellio says:

    Yes, I think asking this question is to the point.
    It takes a great deal of time and patience to attract that kind of large grant to well established charities…. and the charities have specific and focused specialties.

  34. Avatar HankP says:

    and yet Charity Watch rates them an “A” for having low overhead, low cost of fundraising and donating 88% of all funds to charity, which is pretty good as these organizations go.
    https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillary-chelsea-clinton-foundation/478
    But I know the word “Clinton” is in the name so it must be evil.

  35. Avatar Tyler says:

    Nancy,
    You are the best argument for repealing the 19th Amendment I can think of.

  36. Avatar Tyler says:

    Babelfish,
    Yes, when I think Libertarian I think “government coercion forcing Christians to participate in homo marriage” like Gary Johnson is all about. Cause that’s what freedom is all about, right?
    Libertarianism was Autism Goes to Washington but now its been subverted by SJWs who like to get high.

  37. Avatar Tyler says:

    JohnH,
    Shorter this guy: LA LA LA LA LA I CAN’T HEAR YOU.
    Protip: Other charities don’t have an active SoS at its head.

  38. Avatar Tyler says:

    OT:
    Mr. Habakkuk,
    Congrats on you and your fellows throwing off the chains of the EU.
    You guys pulled it off. I can only hope we have the same success you did.

  39. Avatar Grimgrin says:

    Charities have to file public returns in Canada:
    Search them here if you like: http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/chrts-gvng/lstngs/menu-eng.html
    I searched and it looks like they’re filed up to 2014. They’re claiming issued receipts of $115,550 in that year. Total expenditures on management and administration were $737,441
    So either this is a chicken-feed operation for the Clintons or they need to get audited post-haste.

  40. Avatar turcopolier says:

    Grimgrin
    The proprietor gave them $31 million US. Are you serious? pl

  41. Avatar robt willmann says:

    Dubhaltach,
    The federal RICO law is found in Title 18, United States Code, sections 1961-1968, and applies to both civil and criminal cases–
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-96
    You have to prove, among other things, a “pattern” of “racketeering activity” (predicate act). There is a laundry list of bad conduct that is racketeering activity, and when the law was first passed, the list was not very long. But Congress over time added quite a few more instances of conduct to the list, including after lobbying by Hollywood and the music industry to make some copyright violations and “pirated copies” a type of racketeering activity–
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1961
    Way back when I kept up with it somewhat, a “pattern” could be two or more instances of the racketeering activity on the laundry list, and so that part was pretty easy to prove, but I do not know what the present interpretation is as to how many instances of bad conduct can be a pattern.
    The language of the possible violations is in section 1962–
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1962
    The favorite federal criminal law — conspiracy — is of course also made a violation in section 1962(d).
    The RICO law was a whole new concept of liability, especially in criminal law, and so numerous cases were appealed, and there has been a lot interpretation of the words and phrases in it. As Col. Lang said, some states have adopted their own version of the RICO law.
    Robert Blakey, who was and is a law professor at the Notre Dame Law School, is one of the principal creators and drafters of the RICO statute–
    http://law.nd.edu/directory/g-blakey/
    http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/603/
    http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1604&context=law_faculty_scholarship

  42. Avatar rjj says:

    all week the headlines were REMAIN IS SURGING IN THE POLLS. Earlier when I tried to get some news via BBC they were discussing the Lorena Bobbitt case and its global implications. Was about to repair to a darkened room with a cold compress when it occurred to me some crypto-renegade producer was taking the piss by putting that story on at that time.
    Thanks for posting that, Tyler.

  43. Avatar Freudenschade says:

    It looks like the Canadian charity released 24 of the over 1000 donor names.
    http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2016/06/06/clinton-foundation-opaque-fundraising-arm-campaign

  44. Avatar Grimgrin says:

    I seriously think someone from the CRA should audit them given that the scheme you’ve outlined would be, at minimum, grounds for revoking the charities status likely expose the charity to significant civil penalties. The either or was a perhaps too flippant suggestion that the foundation had been entirely honest and forthright in its dealings.

  45. Avatar walrus says:

    @Keith Harbaugh; Credibility??????? If any of this stuff was not credible, the the Clinton foundation, the DNC or the Clinton campaign would say so.
    Instead they attack the conduit of the leak, not the truthiness of the leak material itself.

  46. Avatar rjj says:

    Finance is war by other means. Brits will be put through a rough patch to encourage the others. On BBC various people are bad mouthing populism, lumpenvoters, and the elderly (for their attachment to a creed outworn). Press will amp up coverage all the bad things that happen when FU voters get their way. Could have a chilling effect here.

  47. Avatar Nancy K says:

    I feel Trump is not acceptable to a rational person which is why I am not voting for him.

  48. Avatar Nancy K says:

    I do live in a battleground state, NC

  49. Avatar Nancy K says:

    Yes Reagan

  50. Avatar Nancy K says:

    And you never disappoint me in your well thought out and articulated arguments.

  51. Avatar LeaNder says:

    JohnH, I once voted to send a message. But I live in a different system concerning possible parties I can elect.
    By now it looks as if recent developments have completely changed the scenario I will face in the next election.
    The underlying issues are much bigger it feels, and I see no one, or no serious ideas offered to deal with them in a holistic way. Maybe that is why we increasingly see people quite successfully focusing the on single issues.

  52. Fred Fred says:

    Tyler,
    Where o where is the EU Lincoln to save the Union? Or should it be “The EU needs Turkey now more than ever?”

  53. Avatar turcopolier says:

    freudenschade
    Yes, the magic 24 are listed in various of the Canadian outfit’s documents. That is what you would do. Look over here! Look at my hand! No! No! Don’t look anywhere else! Look at my hand! pl

  54. Avatar LeaNder says:

    Harry, when I read your post, I suddenly had this line on my mind. Wondering, where did it come from, was it from a poem?
    Then I realized, while reflecting how to put it into English, it was from an “incriminating essay”. It was also, one of the most cherished type of evidence on the left, a phrase in an essay that proved a playwright was extreme-right-wing.
    Strictly it later resulted for me in something of an ideological investigation. But in the context, were I was confronted with it, the essay it belongs to served to prove the play-write was extremely right-wing, leading to onto a related path. What else in the play could possibly be further evidence, he had some type of secret extreme right agenda, is all I recall from my practical times in a public theater over here in German which I was forcefully drawn in as a result. It went as far, as wrong theories on dealing with death by the way.
    Investigation, in a nutshell: it was easy to trace the evidence sentiments were based on. It all led back to “Der Spiegel”, … and more hesitantly, really, how helpful it may be to have some type of carthasis-delivering-scapegoat that absolves one of ones own fears in the larger context outside the art section. And how that filtered down into the art section.
    Also full discovery: I have to admit obviously, he was careerist, one of my fiercest opponents once, using all types of dirty tricks, to show I was a fascist. To him that seemed the only possible way I could defend the play-write to start with. … Further, I had not the least intentions to get any type of job in the larger context, I simply worked on staging as interpretation and needed a look beyond the last full rehearsal and the premiere on guess who, the author. While he hoped to be hired as stage director, or at least being given the chance to get a chance to use the premises of the local public theater for his own student theater group stagings. Strictly, there is ample evidence he wasn’t really left, but helpful on his career path, apparently.
    Recently I noticed: He apparently likes to see his name on the screen. That’s not a real surprise to me. Explanation: if you are involved with a production in the film or TV trade your name will be added somewhere at the end. The routine in one of my special subject on German public television, is to show the name of the screenwriter at the start. Personally I fully approve of this routine. Next to the actors this is one of my central interests.
    In the special region in which he by now reached a semi higher job on public TV, he apparently has successfully changed this routine to add his own name too behind “production”. Maybe I am wrong, but it feels I have never seen this before. AND I wouldn’t have known, and strictly neither would I have been in the slightest interested in what happened to him. If this had not brought him to my attention after all these years.
    This is the phrase: heavy doors are slamming shut The author’s essay which initially appeared in “Der Spiegel”, was later published in a collection of the right. I bought it, since I knew by then, that Der Spiegel had abbreviated it. I wouldn’t want to decide, if that was a result or some type of proof of he had always leaned that way. He is the son of a very old father. Could that serve as evidence for my once enemy? Besides: The author can be very, very cryptic. But I like what he wrote a lot. Some of it I love. In other words, my opponents in his efforts to prove that I was really a fascist, may have had a point. You tell me. But I still think, I am basically left or progressive. Only that I do not think progressive can mean the same as it did 100 years ago. Today it would mean honesty and transparency, although, was that already a problem then?
    Not sure, if this is the best way to translate the phrase, by the way. Our doors “are ‘falling’ into the lock”. And in case, you don’t know, I am German.

  55. Avatar Babak Makkinejad says:

    Ah, but do not forget the idea of “Pursuit of Happiness”; who are you to tell a man to not have sex with his grand-mother if that is what makes the both of them happy?
    And, of course, Government should not legislate morality – perhaps they ought to repeal the laws against “Indentured Servitude”, “Predatory Lending”, as well as “Food and Medicinal Safety” and “Organ Selling” – it is all Freedom.
    “People should be free to sell themselves into slavery.”

  56. Avatar robt willmann says:

    The vote to leave the European Union was a wonderful result. Thankfully, Britain still used paper ballots for voting. Otherwise, you can say with certainty, that if electronic voting machines had been used, the result would have been 51.9% to stay in the EU and 48.1% to leave, or maybe an even closer result than that. After all, with electronic voting machines, no recount is possible.
    Now we will see if Obama follows through with his threat to try to punish Britain through trade policy if it leaves the EU.

  57. Avatar Jack says:

    OK. A Reagan Democrat? I know several. IMO, this year this group will be a crucial voter in the deciding states. How they swing will play a large role in determining who wins the electoral college.

  58. Avatar johnf says:

    I suspect there could be rejoicing in Russia.
    Even before Cameron had resigned, our Defence Secretary was on the Beeb lamenting the vote and saying that because Britain was the main engine in the EU for imposing andmaintaining sanctions, Europe would no longer have the will to continue them or the military confrontation.
    Sixty years ago General de Gaulle vetoed Britain’s entrance into the Common Market because he argued we were merely America’s stalking horse.

  59. Avatar Jack says:

    Tyler, Fred
    While the English and Welsh voted to Brexit, Scotland and N.Ireland voted to Remain.There was also a large generational divide, with the under 35 voting to Remain while those more older doing the opposite.
    If one looks at the history of popular votes and the EU, whenever people rejected the Soviet structure, they were either made to vote again or some other subterfuge was found to grow the scale and scope of the powers of the Brussels commissars.
    It seems Boris Johnson, the former mayor of London and one of the leaders of the Leave campaign has stated in his victory speech that there is no rush to invoke Article 50. The section that governs how a member state secedes.
    Let’s see what kind of slow boat if the do get on one the British poohbahs choose.

  60. Avatar b says:

    More on the Clinton pay for access scheme
    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/858997d5d9a540688d316654a5bb0c15/clintons-state-dept-calendar-missing-scores-entries
    /quote/
    But the identities of her breakfast guests would be left off of her official State Department calendar — omissions that are among scores of names and events missing from Clinton’s historical record of her daily activities as secretary of state, an Associated Press review found.
    Now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, Clinton met that morning with a dozen chief executives, most of whose firms had lobbied the government and donated to her family’s global charity, the Clinton Foundation. The event was closed to the press and merited only a brief mention in her official calendar, which omitted the names of all her guests — among them Blackstone Group Chairman Steven Schwarzman, PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi and then-New York Bank of Mellon CEO Robert Kelly.

    The AP review of Clinton’s calendar — her after-the-fact, official chronology of the events of her four-year term — identified at least 75 meetings with longtime political donors and loyalists, Clinton Foundation contributors and corporate and other outside interests that were either not recorded or listed with identifying details scrubbed.
    /endquote/

  61. Avatar LeaNder says:

    There surely is no end in concocting ridiculous examples to prove one’s point.
    Try again

  62. Avatar Babak Makkinejad says:

    Sure thing; how about this one:
    “Me and my sheep are a family; God loves us and who are you to tell me whom to love…”.

  63. Avatar Freudenschade says:

    Once again in violent agreement. A paltry 24 names does seem like misdirection.

  64. Avatar LeaNder says:

    I am a bit puzzled, Joe. Note I appreciate Charles Ortel’s work a lot. But do have neither the patience nor the knowledge to dive deeper into it.
    (from the recent article) State, federal, and foreign laws bar public charities from being run for private gain in interstate commerce—which means, by using the mail, telephones or the internet.
    I do not understand. Is anyone around here sure what he alludes to? In case he is alluding to contracts being set up by these means only.? Those no doubt may need to be on paper with a certifiable signature everywhere. Just as the respective copy needs to be in the charity/business papers. More randomly, whatever it is. Can he be sure it don’t exist?
    To arbitrarily pick out some matters, maybe a more personal note first to indicate where I am coming from, and why I didn’t look at the charts at the end of his recent article.
    careful and experienced analysts easily can miss ongoing frauds carried out by persons linked to the Clinton Foundation who have derived illegal financial benefits in many ways and who have operated related charities and businesses illegally.

    One of my few cousins, is what we call a “Volkswirt” versus a “Betriebswirt”, both are areas of economical studies over here. Whenever I want to allude to it, I have a problem in how to translate it. Volkswirtschaft is something like national economy versus the economy of the single enterprise.
    This cousin once worked for a huge business as some type of investigator, to put it a layman’s term. Till this one day, when his then superiors forced him to sign a paper leaving out whatever he discovered. He decided at that point to give up a rather lucrative job, opened his own business and as a result of being confronted with the toubles of medium sized down to smaller business drifted more and more to the right. Mind you I sometimes wondered, why he was so sure he had all the small business records. Not least since he claimed that to earn even less then their employess. Mind you, I helped artists to deal with taxes among other things, and they often received the money for whatever they sold in cash. Guess why?
    On the other hand, some of the most recent tools in the financial market seem to profit from “milking” the state as if it was a cow. I’ll end on that. On of the tools in the fiancial markets exploiting existing legal loopholes. Not that this is a new idea, maybe a variation on a theme?
    (from the accompanying document) For too long, too many have suspended natural disbelief, and failed to appreciate that one of the most powerful political dynasties in America has been brazenly operating a mammoth, illegal, fundraising scheme that enriches itself and connected cronies, while pinching numerous governments by creating costly, unwarranted tax deductions.
    The Clinton Foundation steadfastly resists making proper accounting for its inflows, so it is difficult to discern who actually provides support without studying reams of material issued by donors that is available in the public domain.
    Counter-intuitively, the likelihood is that taxpayers (through government entities) and small donors (via illegally organized and porous, internet-based fundraising appeals) send more towards the Clinton family and supposed charities, than do wealthy donors.
    That said, rich donors also contribute, and many of them have illegally obtained valuable financial and other returns thanks to patronage from the Clinton family, forging business
    transactions in the guise of charity.

    Alluding to only the content of the first paragraph here: If some of the companies profited from special moneyflows for setting up structures/network, which the government hoped would create jobs in the long run, or got simply a tax deduction for a while for doing so, that may be business as usual. We have competition among cities in that field, giving firms the chance to pick the offer of the most generous bidder. We had competition on the European state level for the same reasons. As far as Haiti is concerned, what are the laws there? If he is alluding to a non-business connected scheme, that would refer to one of the latest schemes in the financial market’s tool box to milk the state that cought my attention, which for whatever reason hasn’t been closed thus allowing players to conduct business as usual, even after it had attracted attention apparently.

  65. Avatar LeaNder says:

    I know farmers, who indeed “love” their sheep, as all their animals, even naming them. Not that they are still the majority, I guess. …

  66. Avatar turcopolier says:

    LeaNder
    They don’t kill the sheep or sell them to an abattoire? pl

  67. Avatar Babak Makkinejad says:

    Now, now, one wouldn’t do that to family, would they?

  68. Avatar Babak Makkinejad says:

    Right, like Montana; where there were lots of men, few women, and the sheep were nervous.

  69. Avatar Akira says:

    Great article from last year:
    http://harpers.org/blog/2015/11/shaky-foundations/
    One money-laundering expert and former intelligence officer based in the Middle East who had access to the foundation’s confidential banking information told me that members of royal families in Middle Eastern countries, including Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates, have donated money to the CGEP that has then been sluiced through to the Clinton Foundation. He added that the CGEP has also received money from corrupt officials in South Africa during the regime of Jacob Zuma and from senior officials in Equatorial Guinea, one of the most brutal and crooked dictatorships in the world. “Equatorial Guinea doesn’t give to the Clinton Foundation in New York because it’s too embarrassing,” he said. “They give the money anonymously in Canada and that buys them political protection in the United States. The Clinton Foundation is a professionally structured money-laundering operation.”

    So why haven’t the Clintons gotten caught? My intelligence source summed up the situation perfectly in explaining why the Benghazi Committee has not thus far bagged them. “The Democrats are stupid but they have ruthless leadership. The Republicans are even dumber. Donald Trump is an idiot but he’s right about one thing: We are led by stupid people. These are some of the dumbest MFs I have ever seen.”
    Scott Horton interviewed the Author here:
    http://dissentradio.com/radio/15_11_18_silverstein.mp3
    http://dissentradio.com/radio/16_06_04_silverstein.mp3

  70. Avatar Fred says:

    Babak,
    You don’t need to go that far. Just think cousins, or sister, or daughters – like Woody Allen.

  71. Avatar The Beaver says:

    Colonel,
    The latest one:
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CLINTON_EMAIL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
    Former Secretary Hillary Clinton failed to turn over a copy of a key message involving problems caused by her use of a private homebrew email server, the State Department confirmed Thursday. The disclosure makes it unclear what other work-related emails may have been deleted by the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

  72. Avatar Fred says:

    Jack,
    Now you understand why the British disarmed their population after our revolution. That is why we had the children’s sit in at the House of Representatives, to increase the propaganda campaign in support of disarming Americans.

  73. Avatar Tyler says:

    Nancy,
    You do all the heavy lifting for me when it comes to making an argument against you. All I have to do is sit back and watch.

  74. Avatar Tyler says:

    rjj,
    Here for you.

  75. Avatar Tyler says:

    rjj,
    I am sick and tired of jowly, flabby bodies/low test gay face spergs rambling on about “the economy” as if all a country exists for is a GDP.
    These pathetic worms have no clue of the blood, treasure, and history behind what a country means.
    As Spengler said “Money is overthrown and abolished with blood.”

  76. Avatar Tyler says:

    Fred,
    Mama Merkel will sure not double down on her menopausal insanity I’m sure.

  77. Avatar Tyler says:

    robt,
    I thought it was funny that the polling electors were outraged someone would want to use pen.

  78. Avatar Tyler says:

    Jack,
    If they try that, I hope whatever the reap makes Cromwell look like an enthusiastic youth group leader.

  79. Avatar ISL says:

    TBased on your argument that this is Russian disinformation, well, then you are accusing HRC of being a Russian agent, since the court has forced some of her emails. Or do you think the court system faked them and our entire legal system is controlled from Russia?
    I suppose you have problem with the meaning of the word “is.”

  80. Avatar Tyler says:

    johnf,
    Oh no, less wars we don’t need. How awful.
    I’m telling you, these people are evil.

  81. Avatar JustPlainDave says:

    That article is factually incorrect on the critical piece of information that would make such a scheme effective. Contrary to what the author maintains, Canadian charities absolutely are required to disclose the identity of donors to Canada Revenue Agency, in the sense they must keep records of donations and disclose the identity of donors to CRA on request. Charities are regularly de-registered (i.e., they lose the status of being registered charities) for not keeping adequate records of donations.
    From what I can see, there is little relative security benefit to routing funds through an offshore Canadian charity vs. routing funds directly to the foundation. Donor identities for both Canadian registered charities and American 501(c)3 organizations are considered confidential (i.e., non-public). However, as mentioned, donor identities are not secret from government in either country. It would theoretically be possible to funnel funds through cut-out identities, but in both countries, to do this at any significant scale, one would have to remain under the detection thresholds of the respective national financial tracking systems, which function quite similarly (by design).
    All that said, the foundation stands out as quite unusual in its degree of international linkage and influence – I would focus my inquiry there rather than at the more sensational possibility of laundering regimes.

  82. Avatar turcopolier says:

    JustPlainDave
    “there is little relative security benefit to routing funds through an offshore Canadian charity vs. routing funds directly to the foundation.” does the Canadian government make public the names of such donors? http://www.taxexemptionlaw.com/non-profit-information/disclosures.htm “The Form 990 series or the Annual Information Return must be given to the IRS together with all supporting documents. But a company under non-profit law needs not to name its contributors or submit their Schedule B. There is still some information that can be excluded from being open to the public for the purposes of inspection. These documents may only be disclosed for a period of three years right after the due date of the tax return” This cited legal decision does not seem to support your statement at least on the US side of the border. pl

  83. Avatar Thomas says:

    “…one would have to remain under the detection thresholds of the respective national financial tracking systems, which function quite similarly (by design).”
    No problem if you have your “people” sitting in the chair at the tracking center.

  84. Avatar JustPlainDave says:

    The Canadian government does not require charities to make public listings of their donors, but they must disclose them to CRA.
    IRS policy towards 501(c)3 organizations is similar, with the caveat that individual amounts do seem to be required to be disclosed on request (certainly I have seen copies of the Clinton Foundation’s [and many other organizations’] Schedule B with individual gift amounts present).
    https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/public-disclosure-and-availability-of-exempt-organizations-returns-and-applications-contributors-identities-not-subject-to-disclosure
    Is a tax-exempt organization required to disclose the names or addresses of its contributors?
    A tax-exempt organization is generally not required to disclose publicly the names or addresses of its contributors set forth on its annual return, including Schedule B (Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF). The regulations specifically exclude the name and address of any contributor to the organization from the definition of disclosable documents. Contributor names and addresses listed on an exempt organization’s exemption application are subject to disclosure, however.”

  85. Avatar Dkmich says:

    And she is? Instead if falling in line like a good little soldier, why don’t you vote third party. No matter who wins, we’re all screwed.

  86. Avatar TonyL says:

    Fred & Tyler & Babak,
    I think I am going to coin a new acronym: ASJW.
    “Anti-Social Justice Warrior” (commonly abbreviated ASJW) is a pejorative term for an individual who engages in identity politics, promoting socially regressive views; including anything against feminism, civil rights, multiculturalism.
    Does this sound reasonable?

  87. Avatar Babak Makkinejad says:

    There is already a word for people like me: “sane”.

  88. Avatar Keith Harbaugh says:

    You read too much into my comment.
    My question was not about the emails that have been released due to court order,
    but about the information attributed to “Guccifer 2”.
    That has nothing to do with the court-ordered releases,
    or other information released by the USG,
    with which I have no reason to question.
    As to “Guccifer 2”,
    at one time intelligence agencies rated the information they received:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_source_and_information_reliability
    Based on the limited information I have on this information,
    using the scheme at Wikipedia,
    I would rate the information attributed to “Guccifer 2” as F3.
    The colonel has no doubt rated many such reports.
    I wonder how he would rate this.

  89. Avatar turcopolier says:

    KH
    As you know what counts in all source analysis is the total picture on a net basis not one piece of information. Do you work for the Clinton campaign? pl

  90. Fred Fred says:

    TonyL,
    You are free to create any term you like but it sounds more like a whine from someone who doesn’t like people who don’t agree with him.

  91. Avatar TonyL says:

    No, just try to show how ridiculous it sounds, if someone from the opposite side of your viewpoint saying that.

  92. Avatar shepherd says:

    Col. Lang,
    For what it’s worth, these are all clippings of real news stories assembled into a dossier, often with fake headlines or misleading edits. While the Clintons did take money from all of these people, and that’s a bad thing, this is not an internal document to their organization–for a lot of reasons.
    For example, on the first entry you see:
    Associated Press On Clinton Foundation Donors: “Governments, Corporations And Billionaires With Their Own Interests In U.S. Foreign Policy Gave The Former President’s Charity Millions Of Dollars.” “The world opened its wallet for Bill Clinton. Governments, corporations and billionaires with their own interests in U.S. foreign policy gave the former president’s charity millions of dollars, according to records he released Thursday to lay bare any financial entanglements that could affect his wife Hillary Rodham Clinton as the next secretary of state.” [Associated Press, 1/18/09]
    The Associated Press did not write the first sentence, though it is attributed to it. It is not something a news organization would say. It is original to this document, according to Google.
    The next part is in the story, though it’s edited slightly. The original headline was: “Saudis, Indians among Clinton charity donors.” The article, while far from flattering, has a much more balanced tone. You can find the original here: http://newsok.com/article/3331367. Or here: http://www.cleveland.com/politics/index.ssf/2008/12/saudis_indians_among_clinton_f.html
    For the second entry, you can also note the context provided that softens the harshness of the cherry-picked clipping: http://abc7ny.com/archive/6562757/ .
    There would be no reason the Clintons would create something like this. They would be paying for a document that compiles and exaggerates their sins. Somebody else decided to assemble this independently and present it as a leak to give it extra force. It’s propaganda.
    By the way, I am not a Clinton partisan at all.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.