General Discussion

NewJeffCT

(56,833 posts)

24. Easy target to create doubt

Reply to obamanut2012 (Reply #21)

Mon Jun 27, 2016, 02:09 PM

Jun 2016

even though it's been well regarded for as long as I can remember. If you get Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, The Washington Times and NY Post and others making implications that it's a political slush fund for foreign leaders and businessmen to bribe the Clintons, it's easy enough for the Dittoheads and Fox News followers to believe it. And, if they start believing it, it slips into real news coverage, even if it is to rebut what's on Fox or on Rush. Then, it just feeds into the "where there is smoke, there is fire" message that Republicans have been crafting on the Clintons for 25 years. ("All those problems, there must be something there or else why keep bringing it up?&quot

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

96 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Clinton Foundation gets 'A' rating for spending 88-89% of funds on charity [View all] Triana Jun 2016 OP

off to greatest, and waiting for the usual in 3. . . 2 . . . . 1. . niyad Jun 2016 #1

howziss? Gabi Hayes Jun 2016 #4

an obvious fraud is Donnie larkrake Jun 2016 #49

The planetary scale of the Clinton Global Initiative, Hortensis Jun 2016 #72

And of course Trump will immediately Twitter tavernier Jun 2016 #2

Great! mcar Jun 2016 #3

K&R!! Peacetrain Jun 2016 #5

Massive K & R for the dose of positive reality... Surya Gayatri Jun 2016 #6

K&R ismnotwasm Jun 2016 #7

Kick & highly Recommended! William769 Jun 2016 #8

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #9

Im sure the FBI will take that into consideration litlbilly Jun 2016 #10

The Clintons have had more lies told about them than any couple in the history of the world. MohRokTah Jun 2016 #11

The Clintons are the most honest people in politics: we know because lewebley3 Jun 2016 #26

But ... Are they really lies, if one really wants to believe it AND ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #29

remember all the political dramaists who would shake their heads sadly at the mention of the Clinton MariaThinks Jun 2016 #12

Thats pretty good OpEx for a charity. AtheistCrusader Jun 2016 #13

In all their decades in public life, the Clintons have striven to do good... Hekate Jun 2016 #14

+1000. n/t pnwmom Jun 2016 #19

Thanks. I see Post Removed chimed in, too. Whee. Hekate Jun 2016 #63

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #48

K & R SunSeeker Jun 2016 #15

Kick n/t Upthevibe Jun 2016 #16

That is an amazing percentage... tallahasseedem Jun 2016 #17

Thanks for fighting the RW lies with the facts! pnwmom Jun 2016 #18

K&R... spanone Jun 2016 #20

Yeah, I don't get all the smears against the Foundation obamanut2012 Jun 2016 #21

Easy target to create doubt NewJeffCT Jun 2016 #24

True; but more 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #31

Ageed: and this rating puts all the lies about the foundation to rest lewebley3 Jun 2016 #27

I doubt that's the case. Chicago1980 Jun 2016 #87

Not just Republicans. eom tarheelsunc Jun 2016 #94

K&R. Thank you, thank you so much for posting this! This is who the Clintons really are lunamagica Jun 2016 #22

Classy just so Classy .. k & R Tribalceltic Jun 2016 #23

That is part of the reason the right wing hates it so much liberal N proud Jun 2016 #25

They are in line with some of the best charities that keeps overhead very low Sheepshank Jun 2016 #28

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #30

What help did Peterson provide provide? ... Or, did you just make that up? 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #32

See the link attached. chapdrum Jun 2016 #36

Okay ... I read the page and saw that the Peterson Foundation gave money to CGI-America ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #39

There isn't a connection. chapdrum Jun 2016 #51

Oh ... so you DID make it up? ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #54

I made nothing up. chapdrum Jun 2016 #64

Yes you did ... you made up the lie that the Peterson Foundation help the Clinton Foundation ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #66

reliance on the Post hoc ergo prompter hoc fallacy to better reinforce a deeply treasured bias. LanternWaste Jun 2016 #57

The post was perfectly clear sulphurdunn Jun 2016 #70

Ahh... A 'The West Wing' reference. Chicago1980 Jun 2016 #88

The Peter Peterson Foundation sulphurdunn Jun 2016 #40

Well, perhaps YOU can answer my question ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #41

I apologize for the "true believer" crack. sulphurdunn Jun 2016 #44

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the OP mcar Jun 2016 #46

Then that is what should have been said sulphurdunn Jun 2016 #47

That is my point. chapdrum Jun 2016 #50

When attempting to make a point, clarity is key. LanternWaste Jun 2016 #60

You win the clever crown. chapdrum Jun 2016 #69

I know who Peterson is and what he represents; but, again, how is his contribution ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #52

Because I didn't like you comment or your tone. sulphurdunn Jun 2016 #65

So you make it a practice to ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #68

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #74

Yes ... It's best to keep that practice in the safety that online line toughness allows. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #75

I think they just wanted you to know your place 1SBM. giftedgirl77 Jun 2016 #79

Ya think? ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #80

+1 fleabiscuit Jun 2016 #93

I guess the Peterson Foundation could have given CAG Jun 2016 #82

It wouldn't have been an issue, worth mentioning. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #83

A primary goal of the Peterson Foundation. Not of the Clinton Foundation. Midnight Writer Jun 2016 #92

Links and sources please to back up your claims Hekate Jun 2016 #34

See the link attached. chapdrum Jun 2016 #37

So what? creeksneakers2 Jun 2016 #71

Thanks Triana for presenting an objective analysis still_one Jun 2016 #33

Wait, I thought that it was just a front to launder foreign cash. Beacool Jun 2016 #35

Exactly, I am quiet proud of President Carter and Clinton, they continued to work for Thinkingabout Jun 2016 #58

Once again, there is no scandal...but that won't stop the GOP from lying over and over. Rex Jun 2016 #38

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #42

This would be a great OP. Or would have been two weeks ago. arcane1 Jun 2016 #53

I posted some of it as an OP nearly a year ago. OnyxCollie Jun 2016 #59

I'd pretend as much as as well if it validated my biases. LanternWaste Jun 2016 #61

Let's see what happens. OnyxCollie Jun 2016 #62

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #89

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #67

Having checked on a few charities in the past, 89% is excellent, about as good as it gets bhikkhu Jun 2016 #43

hmmm... something to consider. nt retrowire Jun 2016 #45

REC. and Thank you for the post. riversedge Jun 2016 #55

This message was self-deleted by its author stopbush Jun 2016 #56

The primary reason for that is that unlike most charities, the Foundation has foreign gov'ts, huge leveymg Jun 2016 #76

This message was self-deleted by its author stopbush Jun 2016 #78

Boom. And down go the republicans and their internet minions. Kingofalldems Jun 2016 #73

And they don't take salaries TexasBushwhacker Jun 2016 #77

I'm actually somewhat disappointed. KentuckyWoman Jun 2016 #81

Given that they are an international charity... Adrahil Jun 2016 #90

Point well taken KentuckyWoman Jul 2016 #96

the haters must be reeling Skittles Jun 2016 #84

K&R nt ProudProgressiveNow Jun 2016 #85

. . . niyad Jun 2016 #86

This is good news. Warren DeMontague Jun 2016 #91

K&R! stonecutter357 Jun 2016 #95