That's a refreshing change! Don't know what/where HRC is up to this weekend, but Friday, she was in a Florida mansion charging a minimum of $2,700 per head for the pleasure of her company. So no pesky reporters taking notes on whatever she promised her donors in exchange for their support. But pity the fools who thought they'd get personal consideration for a measly $2,700.
As documented below, the Clinton campaign's goal is to get 20 new donors of $5 to $10 million each. Now THAT is how you get some input on selection of Supreme Court Justice nominations.

May 29/day-before-yesterday:
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/hillary-clinton-to-attend-central-florida-fundraiser/33281818



And HRC is not doing well with raising the record amount she believes is the path to the presidency. This same report was carried in the New York Times today as well. http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/democrats-need-richer-donor-list-to-keep-up-with-

"Ickes, who is a Priorities USA board member, and other Clinton supporters are discussing how to raise up to $300 million for Democratic outside groups. That is almost twice as much as Democratic super PACs and other outside groups spent to help re-elect President Obama in 2012, when conservative super PACs far outspent liberal ones.

This ambitious goal will require the emergence of a new class of at least 20 Democratic donors who can give $5 million or even $10 million each. Ickes said recruiting them would not be easy. “Our side isn’t used to being asked for that kind of money,” Ickes said. “If you asked them to put up $100 million for a hospital wing, they’d be the first in line.”

The hurdles begin with the candidate. While Clinton has committed to meeting with potential super PAC donors, people close to her say she has not dealt with the kind of big-donor courting that has framed the early months of the Republican race.

Clinton also faces a perception that neither she nor her husband, former President Bill Clinton, is lacking cash. Together, they earned at least $30 million in the past 16 months. And Bill Clinton’s aggressive courting of donors, in the White House and now as head of the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, has been an enduring source of controversy.

The article points out that the Conservative PACs far outspent Obama, but still lost to him. Golly, gee whiz, boys and girls, is it just possible that HRC learned nothing from that fact? She & Bill are so fixated on socking away vast amounts of money and the life styles such cash affords them, that they do not understand that $$$$ are not necessarily the winning path to the Oval Office.

Returning to the mundane world of us non One Percenters, Saturdays and Sundays are the days when most average voters can find time to come see and hear candidates. So who were either or both of the Clintons talking to this weekend?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/06/hillary-clinton-dogged-by-1975-rape-case/

Hillary Clinton's successful 1975 legal defense of an accused rapist has surfaced again with the victim, angered over a tape of Clinton chuckling over her courtroom tactics in the case, lashing out at the potential Democratic presidential candidate.

Clinton is heard laughing as she describes how she succeeded at getting her client a lighter sentence, despite suggesting she knew he was guilty. "He took a lie-detector test! I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs," Clinton said about her client on the tapes, which were initially recorded, but never used, in the early 1980s.

The rape case has been investigated more than once, but with Clinton considering a presidential run, it is again commanding headlines.

Did Clinton take the case voluntarily or was she appointed by the court?

In "Living History," Clinton wrote that the criminal court judge appointed her, and that she "couldn't very well refuse the judge's request." The 2008 Newsday story quotes then-Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson who refers to her as being "appointed by the Circuit Court of Washington County." However, in the newly-released audio tapes Clinton says a prosecutor for the case asked to take the case "as a favor to him."

What else has been written about it?

In 2008, during the height of her presidential primary campaign, Newsday published an in-depth story about Clinton's involvement with the trial. Newsday argued that Clinton's account in "Living History" left out "a significant aspect of her defense strategy - attempting to impugn the credibility of the victim." She reportedly sent an affidavit during the trial requesting the girl undergo a psychiatric examination at the university's clinic, and without offering any source, alleged that the victim had often sought older men. The case, Newsday claimed, "offers a glimpse into the way Clinton deals with crisis. Her approach, then and now, was to immerse herself in even unpleasant tasks with a will to win."

Two years into her career of making change and having Day One-readying experience, 27 year old Hillary Rodham was appointed a public defender in a rape case, and played out deep in the gray areas of morality by attacking the 12-year old victim's credibility. Though nobody involved in the case can recall a shred of evidence that the victim had any sort of history of making false claims, Hillary argued it as a centerpiece of her case anyway. And conveniently omitted this aspect of the case from her 2003 book, "Living History."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/02/24/463280/-Wow-Clinton-Attacked-12-Year-Old-Rape-Victim-s-Credibility-UPDATED#

Hillary Clinton never misses an opportunity to remind us of how much of a warrior she is on behalf of vulnerable children. Children vulnerable to the system. Vulnerable to the callousness of adults.

A 6th grader, Hillary? She "fantasized?" She "sought it out from older men?"

Hillary Clinton, saying shame on others.

UPDATE - To be more clear at what the gray area is here, officers of the court have a responsibility - an ethical responsibility - to adhere to principles of scrupulous honesty. When Hillary signed that affidavit, she was giving a sworn oath that she had knowledge and evidence that the 6th grader had a history of making false charges. That's what the affidavit says. But nobody, including the victim who has no axe to grind, believes this has any truth. That's the core of the Newsday story.

Dale Gibson, the investigator, doesn't recall seeing evidence that the girl had fabricated previous attacks. The assistant prosecutor who handled much of the case for Mahlon Gibson died several years ago. The prosecutor's files on the case, which would have included such details, were destroyed more than decade ago when a flood swept through the county archives, Mahlon Gibson said. Those files also would have included the forensics evidence referenced in "Living History."

That is the difference between zealous defense and breaching ethical responsibility. And every lawyer here knows it.

Try posting a link from Politico which includes negative facts about either Clinton or their foundation's finances and you'll be flamed from here to Sunday with scathing remarks about what a right wing rag Politico is.

If it's a good enough source for Babylon Sister, and for Earl G. to give it pride of place on the Home Page, then it's hypocritical to trash it as a source when you don't like the message. Disagree with the author of an article based on the content of the article, not the fact that he/she was published in Politico.

Source: Investigative Reporter John Ryan, KUOW Seattle

"I'm now at the Port of Seattle, where hundreds of activists are blocking the entrance to Terminal 5, where Shell's Polar Pioneer drill rig is moored. Here's my NPR story on Saturday's protest. More to come."

Hundreds Of 'Kayaktivists' In Seattle Protest Shell's Arctic Drilling
Seattle will be home port to a large Shell Oil Arctic drilling platform when it's not up in the Arctic Ocean. But the city and many residents aren't happy about it.
npr.org


Read more: Link to source

---

This is a FB post I just received within the past hour from investigative journalist, John Ryan, covering this event for KUOW, Seattle. It included a link to his NPR report on Saturday's protest. NOTE: This is a NEW protest, so kindly don't dump this as not current enough!

Click on this link to see photo of one of these huge monsters being towed along the Seattle waterfront. Kayakers are Kayactivists and there's a battle in Seattle to stop arctic drilling.

http://kuow.org/post/shell-oil-rig-arrives-port-seattle
Shell Oil Rig Arrives At Port Of Seattle
By John Ryan • 14 hours ago

Environmental activists in kayaks paddled into the middle of Seattle's Elliott Bay on Thursday afternoon to meet -- or, as they say, "un-welcome" -- a huge Shell oil rig.

The arrival of the Polar Pioneer could raise the stakes in the battle over Shell's oil exploration plans in the remote Arctic Ocean.

Seattle City Council member Mike O'Brien said this is a key moment in the fight against drilling in the Arctic.

"If they had other alternatives that were good alternatives, I imagine they would be there, but they're not," he said of Shell Oil. "Yes, I think there is a chance that when Seattle draws the line and says, 'You are not going to use our port,' this may be the straw that breaks the camel's back. This may be the end of Arctic drilling. This fight that's happening in Seattle could be the end of it."

And an earlier report on KUOW:
http://kuow.org/post/foss-ceo-arctic-drill-rigs-coming-seattle-despite-city-port-objections

Foss CEO: Arctic Drill Rigs Coming To Seattle Despite City, Port Objections
By John Ryan • May 13, 2015

The Seattle Port Commission has voted to delay the arrival of Arctic drill rigs on the Seattle waterfront, but Shell Oil’s contractor is vowing to bring them here anyway.

After a contentious five-hour meeting Tuesday, the Port Commission decided to tell Shell and contractor Foss Maritime that bringing the rigs to Seattle would be illegal, at least for now.
Foss CEO Paul Stevens rejected that. "We're sticking to our plans,” he said. “The oil rigs are coming down this week."

Last week, Mayor Ed Murray announced that the port's permit for cargo ships doesn't apply to oil rigs, so Foss and Shell would have to get a new permit. Such a delay could make it difficult for Shell to get its two rigs up to the Arctic in time for the summer drilling season.

Shell has been planning to bring the two rigs to Seattle, before sending them up to Alaska.
On Tuesday, port commissioners said they didn't want a protracted dispute with the city.

Bill Clinton: "It depends on what your definition of "is" is. For Obama, it all depends on what your definition of "transparency" is.

Words and deeds, baby, words and deeds. I always vote based on the latter, not the former.
Or as the Marlon Brando character in the old film, One Eyed Jacks said, "Talk is cheap, Jack. Make your play."


http://govfresh.com/2009/12/white-house-transparency-and-open-government-memorandum/

Source: Think Progress

Last month, Starbucks came under fire for its bottled water business. An investigation by Mother Jones magazine found that Ethos — the Starbucks-owned water brand created “to help fix the global water crisis” — was sucking groundwater out of a California county in exceptional drought, and making a lot of money doing it.

Now, ostensibly in response to that criticism, Starbucks has announced that it will stop doing that. The company said it would move the sourcing and manufacturing of Ethos water out of California and into Pennsylvania. Moving the entire West Coast operation cross-country would take about six months, it said.

As Mother Jones pointed out in its investigation, the area where Starbucks has been sourcing and bottling its Ethos water for the West Coast has been in severe drought for years. “Placer County, where Ethos’ spring water is drawn, was already declared a natural disaster area by the USDA because of the drought back in 2012,” the article reads. “Merced County, where the bottling facility is located, declared a local emergency due to drought more than a year ago, as ‘extremely dry conditions have persisted since 2012.'” Last month, Placer County declared a water shortage emergency.

Now, Starbucks says it will move its California operations to Pennsylvania, which currently provides the East Coast with its Ethos water. But Pennsylvania also has a drought problem. While nowhere near as bad as California’s, the state Department of Environmental Protection recently issued a drought watch for 27 counties, including the one where Ethos operates.

Read more: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/05/11/3657262/starbucks-dumps-california-bottled-water-drought/

---

Good luck to Starbucks in finding and utilizing springs not at risk of ground water contamination from Pennsylvania's fracking operations!

What is so astounding is that she can get up and categorically deny her actions, speeches, meetings, etc., in support of NAFTA, when there is so much video and documentary evidence giving the lie to those denials.

Her attempt at historical revisionism does not survive the internet.

Reminds one of the classic line from the adulterous husband caught in flagrante delicto, whining "Hey, Baby! Who you gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes?"

(In flagrante delicto is a Latin phrase defined as someone being caught during the act of a crime or sexual act.)

so potential corporate investors cough/boodsuckers/cough looking to take advantage of cheap labor could visit in comfort. Those damned ungrateful, greedy Haitians (do I need a sarcasm emoticon?) expected the Clinton Foundation to direct the "donations" cough/bribes/cough to replace housing destroyed by the earthquake. But that $45 million was used to build a 500 room hotel. That works out to $90,000 per room. Way to go, Clinton Foundation! ! !

Once all of the carnage was assessed, more than 100,000 buildings were damaged or destroyed, hundreds of thousands of people were left without homes and Haiti's government put the death toll at 316,000, according to ABC News.

Five years later, after billions of dollars of aid and donations, many are still living in abject poverty created by the earthquake. NBC News notes that while some $13 billion went to the country, more than "85,000 people still live in crude displacement camps and many more in deplorable conditions."

NBC News does note that while many of the roads destroyed by the earthquake have been repaired and some businesses have been rebuilt, very few people displaced by the massive quake have acquired permanent housing.

http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2015/01/_5_years_after_massive_earthquake_where_is_haiti_now.html


Ten facts about Haiti’s housing crisis from Amnesty International
12 January 2015, 00:00 UTC

Amnesty International’s new report: “15 minutes to leave” - Denial of the right to adequate housing in post-quake Haiti documents the tragic lack of progress made rebuilding the country since the 2010 earthquake five years ago and finds:

1. More than 2 million people were left homeless after the earthquake that struck Haiti on 12 January 2010.

2. According to the latest data (September 2014) 123 camps for internally displaced people (IDPs) remain open in Haiti, housing 85,432 people.

3. Conditions in many IDP camps are dire. A third of all those living in camps do not have access to a latrine. On average 82 people share one toilet. (Compare to 500 toilets at the luxury hotel Clinton "facilitated" - used by 1 or 2 people each.)

4. Forced evictions from camps are a serious and ongoing problem. More than 60,000 people were forcibly evicted from their shelters in makeshift camps since 2010. About a quarter of those remaining in camps are at risk of forced evictions. Amnesty International has documented six cases of forced evictions from IDP camps and informal settlements hosting IDPs since April 2013 alone. More than 1,000 families were affected.

5. Around 37,000 houses are known to have been repaired, rebuilt or built. However, less than 20% of the housing solutions provided as a response to the disaster could be seen as long-term, or sustainable. Instead most programmes have simply provided temporary measures, such as the construction of temporary shelters and the allocation of rental subsidies.

6. Rental subsidies are a common method used by the government and humanitarian organisations. Subsidies of US$500 are handed out to help people pay rent in private accommodation. However, a 2013 survey found that nearly half of those that had been receiving grants had to move out of their homes once the grants ended. Three quarters were forced to move into sub-standard accommodation.

7. Canaan, a large area in the outskirts of Port-au-Prince, has seen its population grow exponentially since the area was declared for public use in March 2010. It is now estimated to be home to around 200,000 people. Many of the residents are people made homeless by the earthquake. In the absence of state interventions in the area, people are building their houses as best as they can and have created their own, often inadequate ways to cope with access to water, waste management and security. Many people in Canaan live under threat of being forcibly evicted.

8. Several infrastructure projects are being undertaken as part of the post-earthquake reconstruction. However, hundreds of families have been forcibly evicted from downtown Port-au-Prince in May 2014 in order to clear the area for the construction of public administration buildings.

9. There was a crisis in the housing sector even before the earthquake. Then Haiti’s national housing deficit was estimated at 700,000 units. At least another 250,000 houses were destroyed or badly damaged by the earthquake. Housing was the sector most affected by the earthquake, with a total damage of US$ 2.300 billion (approximately 40% of the overall damage of the earthquake).

10. The problems in Haiti persist despite the US$13.34 billion pledged by the international community and financial institutions in humanitarian and recovery funding during the post-earthquake response.
Other topics






https://www.amnesty.org/en/articles/news/2015/01/ten-facts-about-haiti-s-housing-crisis/

Although "skim" is too mild a description of the vast funds collected but never quite making their way to actually helping those in need. Millions spent on private jets/5 star hotel at glitzy help-the-poor international conferences, etc. And only 9 to 15% of Foundations' funding actually donated to charity - depending on which source is reporting. Is there a term for the inverse of skimming? The relatively small amounts actually distributed to charities are more like skimming, with the vast majority of the funds tightly clutched to the Clinton Foundation bosom.

Oh and, by the by, the foundation’s $250 million was invested with a firm called Summit Rock Advisers, where Chelsea Clinton’s best friend Nicole Davison Fox is managing director. The two were classmates at Sidwell Friends School, and Davison Fox interned in the Clinton White House. She later served as matron of honor in Clinton’s wedding, and her husband was a founding employee of the hedge fund started by Clinton’s husband, Marc Mezvinsky.
https://nonprofitquarterly.org/philanthropy/25752-hillary-clinton-s-philanthropic-controversy-the-clinton-foundation.html

Pay Attention, Folks! That's two degrees of separation between the Clinton Foundation's hundreds of millions of unspent "donations" and Chelsea's husband's hedge fund. Gee, I wonder if Nicole's firm has parked Clinton Foundation funds in her husband's hedge fund?That would be Eaglevale Partners,noted by the Wall Street Journal to be vastly underperforming. https://in.finance.yahoo.com/news/nytimes-wrote-brutal-takedown-chelsea-140710252.html The answer to that query makes no difference to true believers, of course.

Meanwhile, Charity Navigator put the Clinton Foundation on its “watch list,” which warns potential donors about investing in problematic charities. The 23 charities on the list include the Rev. Al Sharpton’s troubled National Action Network, which is cited for failing to pay payroll taxes for several years.http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.watchlist

We don't evaluate Bill Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.
Why not? We have determined that this charity's atypical business model cannot be accurately captured in our current rating methodology.

https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?keyword_list=Clinton+Foundation&Submit2=Search&bay=search.results

Also meanwhile,

Clinton charity refiles tax return after errors
Hillary Clinton’s family charity has said that it will refile its tax returns after failing to identify tens of millions of dollars donated by foreign governments, in a fresh embarrassment at the start of her presidential campaign.

The Clinton Foundation was already under scrutiny over suggestions that overseas entities showered it with cash while Mrs Clinton was US secretary of state from 2009 to 2013, hoping to win her favour.
The Foundation has now admitted that money from foreign governments was mistakenly combined with other donations in US tax filings over the course of serveral years.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/americas/article4424036.ece

Other nonprofit experts are asking hard questions about the Clinton Foundation’s tax filings in the wake of recent reports that the Clintons traded influence for donations. “It seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for the Clintons,” said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government watchdog group where progressive Democrat and Fordham Law professor Zephyr Teachout was once an organizing director.

Sunlight is a nonprofit transparency watchdog group funded in part since its founding in 2006 by George Soros' Open Society Institute, Ford Foundation, Omidyar Network and the John L. and James S. Knight Foundation, among many others.
https://sunlightfoundation.com/

In July 2013, Eric Braverman, a friend of Chelsea Clinton from when they both worked at McKinsey & Co., took over as CEO of the Clinton Foundation. He took home nearly $275,000 in salary, benefits and a housing allowance from the nonprofit for just five months’ work in 2013, tax filings show. Less than a year later, his salary increased to $395,000,
In December 2014, the board of the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation approved a salary of more than $395,000, plus bonus, for its Yale-educated CEO, Eric Braverman, while voting to extend his board term through 2017, according to sources familiar with the arrangement.

Braverman, who had worked with Chelsea Clinton at the prestigious McKinsey & Company consultancy, had been brought in with the former first daughter’s support to help impose McKinsey-like management rigor to a foundation that had grown into a $2 billion charitable powerhouse. But in January, 2015, only weeks after the board's show of support and just a year and a half after Braverman arrived, he abruptly resigned. Why? The back story is it was after a falling-out with the old Clinton guard over reforms he wanted to impose at the charity. Last month, 74 year old Clinton loyalist, Donna Shalala, a former secretary of health and human services under President Clinton, was hired to replace Braverman.