Does Her Foundation $$ from foreigners, mean anything to Gov Siegelman?

[laserhaas]

Senator Ted Stevens went to prison (falsely) for a frigging chair and purported reduced prices of remodelings. Traficant went to jail (falsely) for a friggin Rent-A-Car (that was paid by someone he didn't ask to pay it). And I'm asking what Governor Siegelman thinks of Hillary Clinton taking millions from foreigners, while Sec. of State?

You don't see 100 prosecutors sending in letters that what Hillary did - is Okay - Do We!

It seems to me that the email issue, is not the primary one; and that we are all being snowed - in a very big way. While Hillary was Secretary of State, the foundation was reported (actually the Foundation confessed) to have been taking contributions from foreigners; and its a fact that is not in dispute, as noted by the year ago story from the Washington Post, titled:

[center] [font size=4]Foreign Governments gave milions to Foundation while Clinton was at State Dept[/font][/center]

The Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration, foundation officials disclosed Wednesday.

Some of the donations came from countries with complicated diplomatic, military and financial relationships with the U.S. government, including Kuwait, Qatar and Oman.

Rarely, if ever, has a potential commander in chief been so closely associated with an organization that has solicited financial support from foreign governments. Clinton formally joined the foundation in 2013 after leaving the State Department, and the organization was renamed the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

[br][hr][br]

First of all, I'm thoroughly miffed that Obama's Administration thinks it has the right to assist the Foundation to circumvent the Code & Rule of Law; and such should be a matter of investigation.

Being POTUS and picking a U.S.A.G. doesn't grant one the right to be an above the law KING!

Secondly - Could anybody else take a position in the U.S. Government and then assign "claim" they are 100% dealing in "arm's length", pure "good faith" negotiations, for their sworn duty client (United States of America) when their family is taking in millions of dollars from those the purported arm's length/ good faith person has auspice over?

How come nobody's sayin......

Compounding that issue are the specious vanishings of tens of thousands of emails, of not only her, but here IT guy. If one - JUST ONE SINGLE SOLITARY EMAIL, of those tens of thousands missing, has anything to do with intent, or her State Department Duties - or discussions, heads up - ANYTHING - about the Foundation...

That's Obstruction of Justice by Destruction of Evidence.

And I'm sayin........

9 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Hillary is being obstructive
	9 (100%)
	She did nothing wrong - whatsoever
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Dr Hobbitstein]

1. Charities are allowed to take money from anywhere.

She wasn't running the charity while SoS.

Speaking of legal stuff, how's your lawsuit working out?

[laserhaas]

2. So Capone can become the Governor, by arranging for Nitti to run a charity

that all the monies come to during and after - from all Chicago kickback entities?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

4. Non-sequitor, much? nt

[laserhaas]

3. As for Haas v Romney (and Sachs) it continues

you are a dispicable person, for taking delight in pouncing on a victim, while the racketeers benefit from corruption;

[Dr Hobbitstein]

5. Racketeering. I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Which is why your lawsuit has gone NOWHERE in the 3+ years you've been peddling it.

[laserhaas]

6. You banter falsley...and I know exactly what it means

Just because corrupt courts keep letting Wall Street firms break the law (specifically many "Predicate Acts" under 18 U.S.C. § 1961)

Doesnt mean the Robber Barons aren't guilty of law breakings

[Dr Hobbitstein]

7. Yes, it's all the corrupt courts.

Couldn't be a frivolous suit. Must be corrupt courts.

[laserhaas]

8. Until you make a legitimate argument - I'm done with your bullchit

Of course it's corrupt courts - we compelled confessions to lying under oath - and the judge said she didn't care.

Had to get back to Tweeter!

You are defending Goldman Sachs and Mitt Romney; and - at the same time - enjoying making fun of a victim.

Says much about your character - DR!

https://shadowproof.com/2015/01/01/the-unending-etoys-com-bankruptcy/

[Dr Hobbitstein]

9. I'm not defending Romney.

I'm calling a frivolous suit what it is.

[laserhaas]

10. With no proof - just snide hate of a victim - for no other reason, than you just like to do so. YOU

ARE defending their position as being valid, by calling mine, invalid (frivolous, vexatious, futile - WhatEver).

Yet you do so without a single, solitary, shred of evidence.

Where I have plenty!
(including one 1/2 decent United States Trustee who didn't know 1/100th of what we no are aware of)

Here's a UCLA Law Professor who wrote a paper on judge's making illegal rulings


http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/05/06/new-study-accuses-bankruptcy-judges-of-routine-illegality/


Like I said, come with facts or be Gone (one way or another)