Why Hillary Clinton's Goldman-Sachs speeches matter.
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/04/12/hillary-clinton-goldman-sachs-why-it-matters/
Can a tax payer sue Clinton for release of those speeches to Goldman-Sachs? If Goldman-Sachs tax deducted those speeches as an "expense", then it would be interesting to find out if a regular taxpayer has "standing" to sue. This would be based on the "regular" taxpayer paying more in taxes or getting less in services because of the lost revenue to the government due to the $675,000 tax deduction.
This situation is why she stands at between 57% and 59% disapproval rate. Her lack of perceived "honesty" makes her a VERY flawed candidate. Frankly, if she were to get elected, if Republicans retain control of the Senate and House, they will file impeachment charges on day one, and there will a transaction by transaction investigations of her and Bill's speeches, their "foundation" and ties to decisions made while she was Secretary of State such as the Swiss bank UBS situation.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/hillary-helps-a-bankand-then-it-pays-bill-15-million-in-speaking-fees/400067/
There are too many risks for her getting elected let alone being allowed to govern due in large part to the and Bill's actions. Is it true they registered corporations in Delaware? If they did, the only reason one does that unless they live in Delaware is to evade and/or avoid something.
There are not only current potential indictments that we know about but there may be some we don't know about. There may be a transaction by transaction investigations of her's and Bill's speeches, their "foundation" and ties to decisions made while she was Secretary of State such as the Swiss bank UBS situation.
Both Clintons have made millions of dollars for themselves and their "Foundation" and the only thing they had to sell was "access" for either past decisions and/or actions and potential future decisions and/or actions.
The bottom line is there are too many risks for her getting elected let alone being allowed to govern due in large part to her's and Bill's actions.
I covered Watergate and the Impeachment for a network of radio stations. I was in the White House press room when Nixon gave his resignation speech and I was in the room when the three articles of impeachment were voted. I pointed out what is being pointed out above in an earlier post in which someone was claiming Clinton could get things done compared to Sanders. Now we also have news due to a withheld email from Clinton's private server in a FOIA lawsuit, that challenges her testimony regarding when certain events occurred. In other words, not only is she a flawed candidate with legal challenges but she may be so flawed even if elected, she won't be able to have enough legitimacy to govern. Better make sure who will be the VP and what they stand for due to this situation.
= new reply since forum marked as read