Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Florencenj2point0

(435 posts)

5. maybe but since they take no salary and never have and since it is non-profit

Reply to cali (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 09:20 AM

Jun 2016

I see no reason why they should stop their charitable work.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

35 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Now that Hillary is the presumptive nominee, it's time [View all] cali Jun 2016 OP

I have no intention of SwampG8r Jun 2016 #1

Well, we'll miss you. Tarc Jun 2016 #2

They will do what they feel is best. boston bean Jun 2016 #3

jaysus. that comment really reveals your blind support cali Jun 2016 #4

Yes, I am a blind supporter without any brain. LOL boston bean Jun 2016 #7

You said it. cali Jun 2016 #9

You are so kind. nt boston bean Jun 2016 #18

maybe but since they take no salary and never have and since it is non-profit Florencenj2point0 Jun 2016 #5

it is a conflict of interest. Period. cali Jun 2016 #10

Wake up and smell the reality ... Scuba Jun 2016 #11

This bullshit again from Peter Schweizer and Alex Jones! randome Jun 2016 #14

Your reply does nothing to counter the claims in the New York Times ... Scuba Jun 2016 #17

Your bogus worship of the likes of Peter Schweizer and Alex Jones is 'lame'. randome Jun 2016 #19

So you're not disputing the NYT report, but will cast aspersions on it. Lame, like always. Scuba Jun 2016 #20

Reporting without context, when something just happens to coincide with one's politics... randome Jun 2016 #21

I provided context. You, on the other hand, defended lies by attacking the messenger. Scuba Jun 2016 #22

That's probably a good idea democrattotheend Jun 2016 #6

How much more can you 'step away' from a public charity organization? randome Jun 2016 #8

Pretty much. I'm saying neither Bill or Chelsea should cali Jun 2016 #13

This message was self-deleted by its author randome Jun 2016 #15

It would be a great PR move and maybe protect HRC to some degree if they announced karynnj Jun 2016 #12

This is problematic and goes to the point that many stated about Clinton Foundation... HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #16

exactly. That story is a perfect example. cali Jun 2016 #23

that's sound political advice, then again Hillary not giving her speeches geek tragedy Jun 2016 #24

I like Hillary a lot Turin_C3PO Jun 2016 #26

damned if she does, damned if she doesn't geek tragedy Jun 2016 #29

She had no choice regarding the speeches. cali Jun 2016 #31

he's more than just some e-trader geek tragedy Jun 2016 #33

Surely you can see that this story illustrates the points made in the op cali Jun 2016 #34

there's an obvious reason he stepped down two days later. geek tragedy Jun 2016 #35

Good points. Turin_C3PO Jun 2016 #32

I think they should if she wins. Adrahil Jun 2016 #25

It is clearly a freaking huge conflict of interest..... Sivart Jun 2016 #27

I agree bigwillq Jun 2016 #28

I agree. It's likely to cause problems. nt Maven Jun 2016 #30