General Discussion

wyldwolf

(43,891 posts)

43. there's that 'progressive' psychic 'I just know it' truthiness evidence again.

Reply to Ramses (Reply #42)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 01:32 AM

Feb 2015

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

66 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Uh Oh... 'Clinton Foundation Taking Funds From Foreign Governments, Keystone XL Group' - FDL [View all] WillyT Feb 2015 OP

+100 ND-Dem Feb 2015 #1

Not surprised at all. peacebird Feb 2015 #2

The Nature Of The Beast... WillyT Feb 2015 #3

We didn't like it when the GOP does it...... nc4bo Feb 2015 #4

Yep... WillyT Feb 2015 #6

I'm with you nc. This stinks! InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2015 #48

But Jebby would be worse! vt_native Feb 2015 #5

This message was self-deleted by its author Ramses Feb 2015 #7

The Clinton Foundation is for charitable causes. It doesn't line the Clintons' pockets. n/t pnwmom Feb 2015 #8

I promise to clap harder and believe the lies Ramses Feb 2015 #10

The "lies" ConservativeDemocrat Feb 2015 #23

I'll go with number one Ramses Feb 2015 #30

I'm not convinced you read your own links... Agschmid Feb 2015 #50

Point exactly where I stated Ramses Feb 2015 #64

Nah I'm good. Agschmid Feb 2015 #66

You absolutely don't read your own links ConservativeDemocrat Feb 2015 #62

You're saying with a straight face Ramses Feb 2015 #63

And Im sure that the keystone company donated millions out od the goodness of their heart Travis_0004 Feb 2015 #11

+1 BeanMusical Feb 2015 #27

It has run in the red for years AtomicKitten Feb 2015 #13

wow Ramses Feb 2015 #14

Here's their annual report. progressoid Feb 2015 #15

It reads like a money laundering operation Ramses Feb 2015 #16

Is Bill running drugs through Mena airport again? You sound concerned. nt msanthrope Feb 2015 #59

"The foundation has come under some scrutiny from conservatives" wyldwolf Feb 2015 #17

nonprofits don't often make, um, profits. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #18

nonprofits aren't supposed to be slush funds either AtomicKitten Feb 2015 #19

until such a time you prove it's a slush fund, I'll just consider that statement bullshit. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #20

They're grifters just like the family Chelsea married into. AtomicKitten Feb 2015 #21

ah, getting desperate, name calling. That's all you've got. All you've EVER had. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #22

She will never be president. Bank on it. AtomicKitten Feb 2015 #24

LOL. Now you're holding your breath and stomping your feet. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #25

We stopped her in '08 and will in '16. AtomicKitten Feb 2015 #28

I'll bet your hitting the keys on your keyboard REAL hard now. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #29

No, I'm sitting on the patio enjoying a Red Stripe. AtomicKitten Feb 2015 #31

Take deep breaths. Check your pulse. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #34

That's some Ken Starr level BS. joshcryer Feb 2015 #46

Thats funny Ramses Feb 2015 #32

It also happens to be true. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #35

Here is some light reading if you care to Ramses Feb 2015 #36

I've already read those. Doesn't come close to making your point (if you actually have one) wyldwolf Feb 2015 #37

If you have read those and dont see a clear conflict of interest Ramses Feb 2015 #38

I don't see anything illegal or unethical. If I missed them, quote the passages. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #39

It WILL come out if she runs Ramses Feb 2015 #42

there's that 'progressive' psychic 'I just know it' truthiness evidence again. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #43

What? Non-profits can make a profit. I work for a non-profit and occasionally we make rhett o rick Feb 2015 #45

Not exactly, if you bring in more money than you spend... joshcryer Feb 2015 #47

The way I see it is, revenue minus expenses equals profit. rhett o rick Feb 2015 #52

You say "occasionally," I say "don't often." Whatever makes you happy. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #51

My point is that being a non-profit has nothing to do with whether or not rhett o rick Feb 2015 #53

I am not a crook!!! BeanMusical Feb 2015 #33

I'm sure the Clinton's will return such funds with a stern look of disapproval. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2015 #9

Since the Clinton foundation focuses on helping lots of nations what in the hell is wrong with Thinkingabout Feb 2015 #12

+1 Hekate Feb 2015 #41

It would be wrong if any of that money made it's way into the hands of the Clintons. rhett o rick Feb 2015 #54

Are you going to say this about Warren in her claim of spending $42M on her campaign and she took Thinkingabout Feb 2015 #55

I don't think the Clintons represent the 99%. I think their ties to Big Bankers rhett o rick Feb 2015 #56

Then you don't know much about the Clintons. Do you think the people they are helping is in the Thinkingabout Feb 2015 #57

Mitt Romney donates to charity also, that alone doesn't mean a thing. If you steal rhett o rick Feb 2015 #58

You seem to be having a hard time admitting the Clintons has helped many people Thinkingabout Feb 2015 #60

I don't hate the Clintons. When you make that claim you ruin any decent argument you might have. rhett o rick Feb 2015 #61

I have also worked hard in my life, it isn't a bed of roses for many. Thinkingabout Feb 2015 #65

Somebody, don't know name fadedrose Feb 2015 #26

You are so right: "Just like TV, nobody in DU ever lies." Hekate Feb 2015 #44

Uh oh: Citizens United blesses the whole enterprise. Don't you wish Bernie had some of that? Hekate Feb 2015 #40

K&R We already know who she is and what she represents, woo me with science Feb 2015 #49