Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Clinton Motto: Contempt and Elitism ^ | July 6, 2014 | Tony Katz

Posted on 07/06/2014 6:51:27 AM PDT by Kaslin

As the expression goes, "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree." When it comes to the Clinton Family the apple never fell, and all associations with the tree leave one contemptuous, elitist and complete incapable of relating to real human beings, real life and reality.

The associations can be wide reaching, like the entire Democrat party. Only the Democrats, who claim to champion women's rights, could think of former President Bill Clinton as a hero. President Clinton was a national embarrassment; he molested an intern in the Oval Office while on the taxpayer's dime.

Make no mistake, Clinton molested Monica Lewinsky. She may say it was consensual. She may believe it was consensual, and I may have no right to disagree with her assessment of what happened to her. But she was a child (she was 22 when Clinton molested her. Based on the new math that kids up till the age 26 can be on their parents' insurance, she was, in fact, a child.)

President Clinton was 51. He was the adult in the room. He chose to molest Lewinsky. He chose the easiest path to what he wanted. Like David Letterman, he didn't even have the decency to pay a professional. That's not someone who should be hailed as a hero. That's a criminal who should spend time in jail.

With former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, contempt and elitism are the standard; the Clinton Family Motto. It was thought the zenith of her Clinton-tude were on full display during the Benghazi hearings when she - quite angrily, as if her child had died in Benghazi - lashed out, screeching, "What difference, at this point, does it make?"

But she reached new heights (depths?) when she spoke with Diane Sawyer about how tough life was after the White House:

"We came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt,” Clinton told Diane Sawyer in an interview with ABC News. “We had no money when we got there, and we struggled to, you know, piece together the resources for mortgages, for houses, for Chelsea’s education. You know, it was not easy.

That's not a typo. That's mortgages and houses. Plural.

Only the elitist thinks that line is connecting with Americans. Next, she'll be talking about conscious uncoupling, or how she was pinned down by gunfire in Bosnia. Oh...wait...

We've come to expect these things from Hillary and Bill, but it came as a surprise (though it shouldn't have) when Chelsea Clinton out-contempted and out-elited the two of them.

As reported by National Review:

In the latest Clinton money quote, the career first daughter pronounced in a Fast Company interview that she has “tried really hard to care about things that were very different from my parents. I was curious if I could care about [money] on some fundamental level, and I couldn’t. That wasn’t the metric of success that I wanted in my life.

Chelsea's entire adult life has been about and around money. Constant money. Floods of money. Tons of money. Her parents have earned over $100 million since they left office. Her husband, Marc Mezvinsky, is a successful investment banker and now has his own hedge fund.

Their wedding cost $3 million. They live in a $10 million apartment in Manhattan.

For her part-time work as the worst interviewer ever to exist on planet Earth (and that includes Bill Press AND Magic Johnson!) she earned $600,000. Some say earned, some say received an untraceable campaign contribution to her mother. Po-tay-toe, Po-tah-toe.

For Chelsea to claim that she doesn't care about money is not just a lie, it's part of the elitism and contempt that the Clintons, as a family, share. Contempt for the little people. Contempt for the truth. Contempt for honesty. And the belief that they are above it all; Specifically, things like money, decency and human life.

The only thing more embarrassing than the Clinton's are those who look up to them.

TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: billclinton; chelsea; chelseaclinton; clintonfamily; clintons; hillaryclinton

1 posted on 07/06/2014 6:51:27 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Ok....I’m a reasonable man. I’d definitely be willing to completely commit to voting for Hillary in 2016, if the Clinton Family can show me independently certified DNA test results that confirm Bill Clinton is the father of Chelsea Clinton.

Do that and you got my vote.

2 posted on 07/06/2014 6:54:37 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
...if the Clinton Family can show me independently certified DNA test results that confirm Bill Clinton is the father of Chelsea Clinton.

And how about; if Hitlary is the mother?

3 posted on 07/06/2014 7:04:09 AM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves" Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Funny yet personally applicable....

Here’s a personal anecdote about that. My niece, a certainly loose and self-destructive woman has had problems with drugs, alcohol, morals and decent behavior all her life.

She hooked up with a Tattoo artist and got pregnant, one of ones she did not abort. She, supported by her parents, took upstanding citizen to court for child support.

His lawyer filed a brief that contended “Is she actually the mother?” Provide Proof. Even before providing evidence that he is the father, this lawyer forced her to provide proof she is the actual mother. Took 6 months.

4 posted on 07/06/2014 7:11:16 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

What a stupid reason to vote for her. *rme* I will never vote for her as I have never and will never vote for any rat

5 posted on 07/06/2014 7:22:29 AM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Apparently you can’t take a joke. Additionally, calling me stupid doesn’t help your case any.

6 posted on 07/06/2014 7:24:51 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin


I think that is right. The Clintons have contempt for everything. They were true, Baby-Boomer socialists when they were young. They came to realize that socialism doesn’t work. They decided then to change course and get as much wealth as possible. Underneath it all, the Clinton’s feel betrayed and sorry for themselves. They thought they had it all figured out when they were young. Time and experience hit them between the eyes like a baseball bat and they became vindictive and vengeful.

7 posted on 07/06/2014 7:26:08 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Does anybody believe the latest from Hillary, that she donates speaking fees she receives from colleges to the Clinton foundation????

She makes it sound as if she is donating the money to charity, but she’s giving it to a closely held family foundation which she controls.

Does she really think that people believe that because the money goes to the Clinton foundation (if true) that this means that Hillary herself didn’t really get a six figure speaking fee??????

Do the Clintons really think they can insult our intelligence with such impunity and score their political points????

8 posted on 07/06/2014 7:30:26 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego (s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
Learn to read. I did not call you stupid. I said it was a stupid idea. Big difference

And what joke? You were probably serious about it. Admit it!!!

9 posted on 07/06/2014 7:31:52 AM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I can’t stand the sight of Chelsea,her teeth remind me of how much I hated those piano leasons when I was young.

10 posted on 07/06/2014 7:33:15 AM PDT by Farmer Dean (stop worrying about what they want to do to you,start thinking about what you want to do to them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
Well that is possible. Notice the keyword is Clinton
11 posted on 07/06/2014 7:33:32 AM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Bill not only molested an intern in the Oval Office he raped four others yet the left loves him true democrats indeed.
And the call them self’s normal.

12 posted on 07/06/2014 7:33:58 AM PDT by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I can read. You attack an obvious challenge akin to “show me where Jimmy Hoffa is buried and I’ll endorse Unions” and can’t even see the obvious. You have no idea, frankly. I am insulted you even thought I’d ever vote for her. You and I are done.

13 posted on 07/06/2014 7:34:32 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: blueunicorn6
I have always believed that about the Clintons.

They were true believers in their youth. Hillary always more of a believer than him.

Then they came to like money. Even more so, they came to detest all the little people they originally felt the calling to fight for. Now, she just sees socialism as her vehicle for more money and power. He just uses any excuse he can to get women and hear himself talk (about himself).

14 posted on 07/06/2014 7:36:38 AM PDT by riri (Plannedopolis-look it up. It's how the elites plan for US to live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Ouch I thought that Chelsea's looks had improved. Sorry, I was wrong.

(Please no piictures of Webb, I am not a believer, she gets her ugly from Bill)

15 posted on 07/06/2014 7:39:15 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

To: Ditter

Don’t worry, I won’t post any pics of Webb. I won’t guarantee though that someone else will.

17 posted on 07/06/2014 7:53:47 AM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

Good and from now on don’t ever post on any of my threads. Got it?

18 posted on 07/06/2014 7:57:02 AM PDT by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
I don't know if Bill Clinton was Chelsey’s father or not, but this I do know, he was the one that played the GOOD parent role as she was growing up, not her mother.
19 posted on 07/06/2014 8:59:16 AM PDT by Coldwater Creek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
For those who may have forgotten what kind of a President Bill Clinton was:

1) Clinton’s own words show his often expressed innate hostility to, and utter contempt for, the core principles of the American founding:

``If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government’s ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, August 12, 1993

``The purpose of government is to reign in the rights of the people’’ –- Bill Clinton during an interview on MTV in 1993

``We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans…that we forget about reality.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, quoted in USA Today, March 11, 1993, Page 2A, ``NRA change: `Omnipotent to powerful’’’ by Debbie Howlett

“When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly… that they would work for the common good, as well as for the individual welfare… However, now there’s a lot of irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say there’s too much freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused, you have to move to limit it.” – Bill Clinton, April 19, 1995

2) Clinton inevitably pursued his own political advantage at the expense of American interests and national security. Here is just one of many possible examples:

It is well documented that Clinton and the Democrats took illegal campaign money from groups and individuals tied directly to the Chinese People’s Republican Army. It is therefore not surprising that In January 1998 Clinton went against the advice of then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher and Pentagon experts by lifting long-standing restrictions against the export of American satellites to China for launch on Chinese rockets. Not only did he move control over such decisions from the more security-focused State Department to the Commerce Department, but he intervened in a Justice Department investigation of Loral Space & Communications, retroactively enabling Loral to sell critical missile technology to the Chinese. Interestingly enough, Clinton’s decision was made at the request of Loral CEO Bernard Schwartz, whose earlier $1.3 million campaign donation made him the single biggest contributor to the Democratic election effort.

The result, as stated eloquently by syndicated columnist Linda Bowles, was that “the Democrats got money from satellite companies and from Chinese communists; China got supercomputors, advanced production equipment and missile technology; Loral got its satellites launched at bargain basement prices . . . and the transfer of sensitive missile technology gave China [for the first time] the capability of depositing bombs on American cities.” Incidentally, Loral ultimately failed to benefit from this permanent injury to America’s security interests: in July 2003, the company filed for bankruptcy protection, and in order to raise cash was forced to sell its most profitable business – a fleet of communications satellites orbiting over North America.

3) On two occasions, Clinton used military action for the specific purpose of distracting the American public from the fallout of the Lewinsky affair:

• On August 20, three days after Clinton finally admitted publicly to the Lewinsky affair, the news media was poised to focus on that day’s grand jury testimony by Monica Lewinsky. That same morning, Clinton personally went on national television to gravely announce his bombing of a Sudanese “chemical weapons factory,” and a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. It was the first time most Americans ever heard the name of Osama bin Laden. The factory bombing in Sudan killed an innocent night watchman, but accomplished little else. It later was proven that the plant was making badly needed pharmaceuticals for people in that poverty-stricken part of the world, but no chemical weapons.

Several months later, the U.S. Center for Nonproliferation Studies, part of the Monterey Institute of International Studies, stated: "...the evidence indicates that the facility had no role whatsoever in chemical weapons development." Kroll Associates, one of the world's most reputable investigative firms, also confirmed that there was no link in any way between the plant and any terrorist organization. As for the Afghanistan bombing, it failed to do any damage at all to bin Laden or his organization. Clinton’s action was accurately characterized by George W. Bush when he said right after 9-11: "When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt.

Clinton’s pointless and murderous military actions did not make Americans safer that day, although they did destroy an innocent life, and for all the good they did certainly could have been delayed in any case. But they did succeed in diverting media attention from Lewinsky’s grand jury testimony for a 24-hour news cycle, which was the main point. So I guess, they weren’t a total loss.

•On December 16, 1998, on the eve of the scheduled House vote on his impeachment, Bill Clinton launched a surprise bombing attack on Baghdad. As justification for this exploit, he cited the urgent threat that Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction posed to America, and the need for immediate action. Almost immediately, the House Democrats held a caucus and emerged calling for a delay in the impeachment proceedings. House minority leader Dick Gephardt made a statement: "We obviously should pass a resolution by saying that we stand behind the troops. I would hope that we do not take up impeachment until the hostilities have completely ended."

Conveniently, a delay so near the end of the House term would have caused the vote to be taken up in the next session – when the newly elected House membership would be seated with more Democratic representation, thereby improving Clinton’s chances of dodging impeachment.

The Republicans did, in fact, agree to delay the hearings, but only for a day or two. Amazingly, Clinton ended the bombing raid after only 70 hours -- once it became clear that in spite of the brief delay, the vote would still be held in the current session.

Once the bombing stopped, Clinton touted the effectiveness and importance of the mission. As reported by ABC News : “We have inflicted significant damage on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction programs, on the command structures that direct and protect that capability, and on his military and security infrastructure,” he said. Defense secretary William Cohen echoed the point: “We estimate that Saddam's missile program has been set back by at least a year.”

Whether or not one buys Clinton’s assessment of that mission, it is difficult to believe that its timing was so critical that it required commencement virtually at the moment the House was scheduled to vote on the impeachment. I think the most reasonable conclusion is that Clinton cynically deployed US military assets and placed military personnel in harm’s way for purely political reasons.

4) Clinton’s reckless sexual behavior was a threat to American national security:

Clinton and his supporters have been very effective in persuading large numbers of Americans that the Lewinsky scandal was “only about sex.” But I see a bigger issue here, because Clinton is on record as saying that he would have done anything to keep knowledge of the Lewinsky affair from becoming public.

To me, that statement raises a very serious question: What if, instead of sending her recorded Lewinsky conversations to Ken Starr, Linda Tripp had instead secretly offered them for sale, say, to the Chinese government? Or to the Russians? Or even to agents of Saddam?

What kind of blackmail leverage would those tapes have provided to a foreign government in dealing with America on sensitive trade, security or military issues? One of the few things Clinton ever said that I believe is that he would have done anything to keep the Lewinsky affair secret. Given his demonstrated track record of selling out American interests for personal or political gain (and there are more examples that I could have cited here), how far would he have gone in compromising America’s real interests in order to protect his own neck when threatened with blackmail?

Pretty far, I believe. Equally distressing is the prospect Clinton might, in fact, have succumbed to foreign black mail on other occasions in order to hide different sexual episodes that ultimately did not become public. There is no way to know, of course, but I prefer presidents for whom such a scenario is not a plausible possibility.

And don’t even get me started on the war crime in Kosovo.


During Bill Clinton’s 1999 NATO-led war in Kosovo – which according to some estimates cost as much as $75 billion – we bombed Belgrade for 78 days, killed almost 3,000 civilians, and shredded the civilian infrastructure (including every bridge across the Danube.)

We devastated the environment, bombed the Chinese embassy, came very close to engaging in armed combat against Russian forces, and in general, pursued a horrific and inhumane strategy to rain misery on the civilian population of Belgrade in order to pressure Milosevic into surrendering.

Why did we do all that? The US did not even have an arguable interest in the Balkans, and no one ever tried to claim that Serbia represented any kind of threat to our nation or our interests.

But for months the Clinton administration had told us that Milosevic was waging a vicious genocide against Albanian Muslims, and needed to be stopped. The New York Times called it a “humanitarian war.” In March 1999 – the same month that the bombing started – Clinton’s State Department publicly suggested that as many as 500,000 Albanian Kosovars had been murdered by Milosevic’s regime. In May of that year, as the bombing campaign was drawing to a close, Secretary of Defense William Cohen lowered that estimate 100,000.

Five years after the bombing, after all the forensic investigations had been completed, the prosecutors at Milosevic’s “War Crimes” trial in the Hague were barely been able to document a questionable figure of perhaps 5,000 “bodies and body parts.” During the war, the American people were told that Kosovo was full of mass graves filled with the bodies of murdered Albanian Muslims. But none were ever found.


During the election cycle of 1992, George H.W. Bush lost his job after Bill Clinton hammered him relentlessly for having caused the “worst economy of the last 50 years.”

In fact, as CNN’s Brooke Jackson has reported: “Three days before Christmas 1992, the National Bureau of Economic Research finally issued its official proclamation that the recession had ended 21 months earlier. What became the longest boom in U.S. history actually began nearly two years before Clinton took office.” See (See

By the same token, Clinton is generally perceived as having a stellar economic record during his own presidency, in spite of the fact that the economy was already starting to decline during the last year of his term after the stock market crashed in March 2000.

According to a report by MSNBC: “The longest economic expansion in U.S. history faltered so much in the summer of 2000 that business output actually contracted for one quarter, the government said Wednesday in releasing a comprehensive revision of the gross domestic product. Based on new data, the Commerce Department said that the GDP — the country’s total output of goods and services — shrank by 0.5 percent at an annual rate in the July-September quarter of 2000.” See:

20 posted on 07/06/2014 9:43:53 AM PDT by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

I do NOT pretend to understand the letter of the laws concerning Money Laundering, but what Hillary is doing certainly sounds like Money Laundering to me.

21 posted on 07/06/2014 9:44:51 AM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Chelsea got hit with an ugly stick then hit some more.

22 posted on 07/06/2014 1:32:33 PM PDT by minnesota_bound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Yoo-hoo,'s your FIL doin'?

Chelsea's father-in-law, Edward "Ed" Mezvinsky is an ex-Democrat congressman.....and a convicted felon. Ed sat on the House Judiciary Committee that decided the fate of Richard Nixon. He was outspoken saying that Nixon was a crook and a disgrace to politics and the nation and should be impeached.

Edward, a lawyer, was married when he met Chelsea's MIL, Marjorie----they soon got married---but divorced after Edward got conned into several notorious Nigerian-based email financial frauds guaranteed to make you rich.

In his haste to get rich quick, to raise money to get in on these "heaven-sent" investment schemes, Edward defrauded many of his friends and business contacts.....including Marjorie's mother.

Alas, when the Nigerians got their hands on Edwards' money, they did a 23 skidoo. Having failed to come up w/ a ROI, Edward got nabbed by the long arm of the law. Mezvinsky pleaded guilty to 31 of 69 felony counts.. He did hard time----spent 7+ years in a federal prison w/ no chance of parole, and still owes $10 million in restitution.

Democrat Congressman 2014 candidate Marjory Margolies is also no stranger to the dollar disease. Because of her husband's felony convictions, she filed for bankruptcy. But the court would NOT discharge her of her debts, finding that she could NOT explain where some $1 million in assets had vanished, in the previous 4 year span...during Mezvitsky's crime spree.

In their heyday, Ed Mezvinsky and then-wife Marjorie, herself a former Democratic congresswoman from Pennsylvania (an ex-TV reporter---and recent election loser), were part of the political and social elite in Philadelphia.

The Mezvinskys were close to Bill and Hillary Clinton and were frequent guests at the White House. Prosecutors say Mezvinsky exploited his ties to the Clintons, including his son's relationship with Chelsea, to woo investors to contribute more money to the Nigerian schemes.

In an interview with Des Moines Register from prison in 2003, Mezvinsky said he found the notoriously fraudulent "Nigerian Black Ink" scam convincing. "The Nigerian man came out with a chemical, threw it on the money, and it all turned to $100 bills. He gave me 10 to have them tested back home. And they were real," Mezvinsky told a reporter.

23 posted on 07/07/2014 6:15:42 AM PDT by Liz (Another Clinton administration? Are you nuts?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Hillary calculatedly told ABC-News' Diane Sawyer about how tough life was: "We came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt,” Clinton told Diane Sawyer in an interview with ABC News. “We had no money when we got there, and we struggled to, you know, piece together the resources for mortgages, for houses, for Chelsea’s education. You know, it was not easy."

The greedy, mega-wealthy Clintons have money pouring in from everywhere without lifting a finger...said to be worth couple BILLION dollars. Never-enough Hillary looked to make a couple more million pumping her book.


Hillary connivingly planned to campaign on "income inequality" .......running as a phony populist. Campaign strategists warned Hillary her "tone" is important.....(so she can better dupe the voters).

THANK YOU KELLY FILE Megyn ran a news clip of Hilly sing-songing "the cancer of inequality" in a contrived sap-happy, chirpy voice, wearing a h-u-g-e phony grin.

Reminded me of the classic Willam Castle horror movie, "Mr Sardonicus," (whose face becomes frozen in a horrifying grin while robbing the coffin of his father's grave).

Hillary wears her perpetual 2016 game face.


The only "good" thing to come out of Hillary's disastrous book tour is the new campaign cry: "Another Clinton administration? Are you nuts."

(Cackle) Will look nice on a bumper sticker.

24 posted on 07/07/2014 6:27:36 AM PDT by Liz (Another Clinton administration? Are you nuts?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
The Clintons are relying heavily on "white privilege" to get back into office. The Clintons' have benefitted from, and are climbing back into office, using privileges far beyond those of the working class voter.

"White privilege" denotes the array of advantages the Clintons have cultivated over years in public office. They are gold-plated w/ the endless perks of "white privilege":

<><> massive wealth in the $2 billion range....

<><> multiple homes in posh enclaves....

<><> the chain of high public offices....

<><> privileged friends in high places....

<><> global connections....

<><> constant affirmations of their own worth....

<><> greater social status...

<><> the expansive freedoms wealth and connections provide...

<><> unlimited access to the press to speak freely.....

<><> Bill/Hillary memoirs made millions....

<><> Dec 2000 book deal $8 million; 2014 book deal $14 mill....

<><> three tax-exempt family foundations worth hundreds of millions....

<><> Clinton foundation "endowment" skyrockets to $200 million overnight....

<><> Hillary's $200,000 speeches to "non-profits".......

<><> Bill's tax-paid cushy pensions/benefits....

<><> tax-paid Clinton Library (Hollywood honey Sultan of Brunei a donor).....

2016 Hillary is relying on the "income equality" bugaboo to hoist herself into office. That is "white privilege" in a nutshell.

The Clintons strategy is to label others as "different" while presenting themselves as "normal." The Clinton "normal" is couple billion dollars laying around without having a real job.

“Lunch-Pail Hillary” planned to run a populist campaign, “critical of the Wall Street types”....that's after Hillary pocketed $200,000 from Goldman Sachs.

25 posted on 07/07/2014 6:34:48 AM PDT by Liz (Another Clinton administration? Are you nuts?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz
I just love the part where she "donates" her speaking fees to herself. Laws are for little people...

Freedom ≠ Free Stuff☭
I, for one, welcome our new Cybernetic Overlords /.
Mash Dobbshead® for HTML, bop Hello_Cthlhu for XAMPP

26 posted on 07/07/2014 6:38:53 AM PDT by Mycroft Holmes (The fool is always greater than the proof.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Mycroft Holmes
Hard to believe the calculated Hillary actually said this---an open confession: Hillary: “All of the six-figure speaking fees have been donated to the Clinton Foundation for it to continue its life-changing and life-saving work."

Life-saving foundation work? Come Again. So how come the Clinton Foundation gae a grant to Harry Reid's grandaughter's little theatre group? Doesn't sound life-saving to me. (more below)


HILLARY: "So the six-figure fees go from a foundation at a university to another foundation,” she told ABC News on Friday.

Oh really---does Hillary know the IRS has stated the biggest foundation scam (money laundering) is one foundation writing a check to another foundation---the shady way the foundation principles skim-off tax-free money for themselves.

Is that why the greedy Clintons formed THREE foundations---to move tax-free money around for themselves.....and for Hillary's ambition?


The Harry Reid connection to the tax-exempt "Clinton Global Initiative" one of the three Clinton foundations needs to be investigated.


(1) Harry Reid's son Rory is in business w/ the Chi/Coms on a multi-billion dollar solar energy project; Cliven Bundy and his land are standing in the way.

(2) Reports say Bill Clinton recently went to China to panhandle for his tax-exempt "Clinton Global Initiative" foundation.

(3) The "Clinton Global Initiative" (NOT KNOWN for giving out grants)---gave Harry Reid's granddaughter a grant for a Brooklyn, NY theatre she runs (what is a Brooklyn theatre's connection to "global initiatives?")

(4) A Nevada energy company also gave Reid's granddaughter's theatre group a grant.


"Money laundering" comes to mind. Could the Chinese be financing the Reid's solar project through donations to the Clinton Foundations....which is then laundered to Reid's granddaughter?


REFERENCE----HARRY REID IS LIVID THAT HIS GRAND-DAUGHTER HAS BEEN OUTED AS A RECIPIENT OF LAUNDERED CAMPAIGN CASH---Reid lashed out at reporters, saying, “My granddaughter has been the target of harassing phone calls, strangers tracking her down, knocking on her door and negative, unwanted attention on the Internet.” “This has gone too far and it needs to stop now,” Reid said. “I deeply regret any role I had in creating this situation but now, as a grandparent, I say enough is enough.”


Besides the "jewelry company" financed by her grandfather, Ryan Elisabeth Reid runs the Sprat Theater Company, a small theater in Brooklyn, which is also coming under scrutiny. According to Sprat’s Theatre Company Web site, it has received grants/contributions from:

<><> the Clinton Global Initiative (connected to global terrorism via Muslim Brotherhood employee),
<><> two major Las Vegas foundations:
Caesar’s Foundation, and the NV Energy Foundation.

NOTE NV Energy Foundation---is a non-profit division of NV Energy (a public utility). The NV Energy utility is a subsidiary of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company which took over in 2013....and is now owned by a Warren Buffet unit.

BTW, here's Harry w/ his grand-daughter....the one who got $31,000 in laundered campaign funds for her "jewelry company" and grants from Clinton and Nevada energy foundations.

Reid and granddaughter Ryan Elisabeth Reid.

27 posted on 07/07/2014 6:49:17 AM PDT by Liz (Another Clinton administration? Are you nuts?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson