Flashback - Nov 23, 2016: [Observer] "Foreign Donors Begin Pulling Out From Clinton Foundation. Overseas governments clearly feel there is nothing left to buy." Which party is more influenced by foreign governments?

[Observer] In 2015, IBTimes conducted an investigative report revealing foreign governments who gave large contributions to the Clinton Foundation—including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Algeria, Oman, UAE and Bahrain—received exponential increases in U.S. weapons exports from the State Department while Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state.

“Because neither Clinton will occupy a prominent role in government in the immediate future—curtailing the willingness of at least some big donors to try and curry favor with the foundation by writing large checks,” reported CNBC on November 19. “Because Hillary Clinton is no longer seen as a president in waiting, contributors may look elsewhere and the foundation may have to rethink its scope and priorities,” philanthropy experts told CNBC. The Clinton Foundation refused to respond to numerous requests from CNBC for comment. ... [Snopes] The Clinton Global Initiative is downsizing and ending annual meetings as of 2017 http://www.snopes.com/clinton-f...ributions-dry/... [CBS News] Chinese company pledged $2 million to Clinton Foundation in 2013 http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chi...ation-in-2013/ ... [New York Times] Donations to the Clinton Foundation, and a Russian Uranium Takeover https://www.nytimes.com/interac...investors.html

Foreign Donors Begin Pulling Out From Clinton FoundationOverseas governments clearly feel there is nothing left to buy.http://observer.com/2016/11/foreign-donors-begin-pulling-out-from-clinton-foundation/
20% Republicans 60% Democrats 20% Other
Mazes avatar
Share
1 9

It is just the way politics has always worked.

@Maze ... for the Democrats.

Trump has Russian. The Bush's had Saudi Arabia, Reagan had Iran, hell Jefferson had France. Always and everyone.

@VicZinc Trump has Russian. The Bush's had Saudi Arabia, Reagan had Iran, hell Jefferson had France. Always and everyone.

WRONG, Hilary had Russia, yet tried to pin it on Trump, Russia had nothing to do with democratic loss, they lost because hilary was a criminal (still is btw) and americans saw her for who she really was, but democrats never like to take responsibility so they point fingers. and seeing that the democrats desperately want war with Russia, decided to pin it on them

@Anonymousmouse WRONG, Hilary had Russia, yet tried to pin it on Trump, Russia had nothing to do with democratic loss, they lost...

Has nothing to do with election, Trump's Russian ties are about business holdings, emoluments, and aggrandizement.

@VicZinc Trump has Russian. The Bush's had Saudi Arabia, Reagan had Iran, hell Jefferson had France. Always and everyone.

I'm pretty sure the Russians were afraid they'd end up in a hot war with the US if Hillary won, so it's clear they preferred Trump, but Trump had no reason to accept bribes from Russian interests the way Hillary did.

The Saudi regime's deal with the US spans both parties and has to do with military protection in exchange for supporting the dollar. They gave a substantial amount of money to Hillary too, but I think it would be more accurate to say the establishment has them.

[Huffington Post] If I told you that Democratic Party lobbyist Tony Podesta, whose brother John Podesta chairs Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, is a registered foreign agent on the Saudi government’s payroll, you’d probably think I was a Trump-thumping, conspiratorial nutcase. But it’s true.

The lobby firm created by both Tony and John Podesta in 1988 receives $140,000 a month from the Saudi government

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/m..._11779826.html

I'm aware of Iran-Contra, but as far as I know it didn't involve Reagan directly. They certainly didn't fund his campaign.
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1889.html

As for Jefferson, the US was fighting for independence from the British Empire, so making a strategic alliance with the Empire's most powerful enemy was their only practical option for victory, and it wasn't about party politics.

@Maze I'm pretty sure the Russians were afraid they'd end up in a hot war with the US if Hillary won, so it's clear they...

Don't disagree with anything you say. But don't try to tell me Trump getting .5% of Rosneft was not a special deal to lift the sanctions Obama put in place.

Trumps Russia connection, and his China connections and other will surface soon. I don't hold it against him, as I said, that's the way the game is played.

@VicZinc Don't disagree with anything you say. But don't try to tell me Trump getting .5% of Rosneft was not a special deal...

Even the highly questionable, unproven dossier (provable aspects of which have been shown to be false), that claimed the offer was made to Carter Page said Page was "noncommital" in his response. The stake allegedly offered to Page in return for Trump lifting sanctions against Russia was later sold to Qatar's sovereign wealth fund, so Trump didn't "get" anything.
http://www.businessinsider.com/...er-2017-1?op=1

Mark my words, foreign governments are elbow deep in the Democrats, and their absurd allegations against Trump are designed to shield them from it. As you know, I think their strategy is a miscalculation, they've sewn the wind and they will reap the whirlwind.

if you see a democrat attackign conservatives, then you know the democrats are the ones doing it, every time they point a finger then you must look at them for being the culprits

Anonymous