That's a joke - guess which crooks didn't might be an easier question...
Posted on 12/20/2007, 4:11:12 PM by jdm
The Clintons have long kept hidden the identities of the donors to their foundation, and now we know why. The New York Times finally got a look at the books, and they discovered millions of dollars coming from people with a lot to lose during the Clinton administration. Shockingly, the pace of donations has accelerated as Hillary comes closer to winning the Democratic presidential nomination:
But an examination of the foundation demonstrates how its fund-raising has at times fostered the potential for conflict.
The New York Times has compiled the first comprehensive list of 97 donors who gave or pledged a total of $69 million for the Clinton presidential library in the final years of the Clinton administration. The examination found that while some $1 million contributors were longtime Clinton friends, others were seeking policy changes from the administration. Two pledged $1 million each while they or their companies were under investigation by the Justice Department.
Other donations came from supporters who had been ensnared in campaign finance scandals surrounding Mr. Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign.
Before we get to the people who appeared to buy favor with the Clintons domestically, we should take a look at the Clinton foreign policy of donations. The foundation took money from the Saudi royal family, the king of Morocco, and the UAE, among others. Remember the fit that the potential sale of management rights for American ports to a Dubai company started? What will this UAE donation cause?
The real interesting part comes with domestic donors. Anheuser-Busch donated $200,000 to the foundation less than a month after winning a favorable ruling on advertising from the Clinton administration’s FTC. Democratic fundraiser William Brandt tossed a million dollars onto the plate while being investigated by the Justice Department for potential perjury to Congress. Three months later, he was off the hook, and now is one of Hillary’s bundlers. Bernard Schwartz, CEO of Loral, gave $250,000 while his company got investigated for improperly giving satellite technology to China. It took the Bush administration to conclude the case with a hefty fine against Loral.
Not everyone got what they wanted. Investors in Nextwave, a struggling telecom, gave six figures and pledged a million dollars while they tried to stave off government intervention for their licenses. When the government confiscated the licenses as part of a bankruptcy proceeding, the investors skipped paying the balance. Nextwave eventually won a lawsuit that returned the licenses.
The tawdriness of the Clintons will unfortunately get played out again for all to see. This time, it appears that the media will not go along so willingly with the Clintons in keeping these connections buried. Certainly, with the advent of the blogosphere, the peccadiloes and petty corruptions in which they engaged will no longer remain secret.
Unfortunately? I think the author means FORTUNATELY.
Unless this info was the result of the FOIA, somebody is going after the Clintons at the knees.
< /sarcasm>
Yep. The crooks are tired of being fleeced.
What would George Washington do?
Well, that didn't take long.
US proposes Lockheed Martin F-16 sale to Morocco
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1942303/posts
Legs!
Get Some serious Legs!
The Saudis gave $10 million to the Clinton Library.
This one is going to be tough blaming on the VWRC.
Is “conservative” Ben Stein, columnist for the “conservative” American Spectator on that list also?
I mean, he appears fond of donating to nasty, lying liberal punks like Al Franken, so why not the Clintons?
Is “conservative” Ben Stein, columnist for the “conservative” American Spectator on that list also?
I mean, he appears fond of donating to nasty, lying liberal punks like Al Franken, so why not the Clintons?
The Clintons will sell-out to anybody. Just anybody.
Long day.
The Modus Operandi for the NYT is to do a half-a$$ed job of reporting it now, so that they can refuse to cover it in the general claiming, "Its old news, that's already been reported."
He may have to kill her over that.
(Picture the last scene in Katherine Turner/Michael Douglas's movie, The War of the Roses.)
http://www.videodetective.com/titledetails.aspx?publishedid=1856
“Remember the fit that the potential sale of management rights for American ports to a Dubai company started? “
Isn’t there a Madeleine Albright connection to that company?
I would have guessed it was the New York Times that donated millions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.