Do Clintons use Charity Donations for Campaigns?

The Clintons are under fire again for potential circumvention of campaign financing laws. This time the question is whether charitable contributions to the Clintons, which do not have to be disclosed, somehow make it into their various campaigns. Specifically, have donations for his library been routed to Hillary’s presidential campaign. There is also some question as to whether these donations have been bribes.

But an examination of the foundation demonstrates how its fund-raising has at times fostered the potential for conflict.

The New York Times has compiled the first comprehensive list of 97 donors who gave or pledged a total of $69 million for the Clinton presidential library in the final years of the Clinton administration. The examination found that while some $1 million contributors were longtime Clinton friends, others were seeking policy changes from the administration. Two pledged $1 million each while they or their companies were under investigation by the Justice Department.

Other donations came from supporters who had been ensnared in campaign finance scandals surrounding Mr. Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign.

In raising record sums for her campaign, Mrs. Clinton has tapped many of the foundation’s donors. At least two dozen have become “Hillraisers,” each bundling $100,000 or more for her presidential bid. The early library donors, combined with their families and political action committees, have contributed at least $784,000 to Mrs. Clinton’s Senate and presidential coffers. NYT

The Clintons have kept the list of donors private but Bill promises to make future donations public only if Hillary gets elected. This does not answer the questions raised by the NYT. Did the Clintons get pay offs from companies under investigation or that had some interest before the government? Just looking at the item above one would have to conclude that there is at least the appearance of a conflict of interest. However, in true Clinton fashion, Bill tells us not to worry.

Even so, past donors should remain private, he insisted, “unless there is some conflict of which I am aware, and there is not.”

Let me interpret; Trust me, there is no conflict. Nothing to see here, move along. If I say it then it is so because I am a trustworthy guy. I would never lie to you.

Only in American politics can this be said with a straight face and only in the world of Clinton can it be said with a delivery that expects it to be believed. With the Senate refusing to consider the nominees for the FEC the Clintons might feel like a cat left alone in a tuna factory.

Clinton = Dirty Criminal. Hillary = Satan.

Big Dog

Others with similar posts:
Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Faultline USA, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, Adam’s Blog, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, The Amboy Times, CORSARI D’ITALIA, Conservative Cat, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Ron Paul a Racist?

I have heard these stories since Paul started gaining momentum and I think they are most likely a bunch of BS. I realize that Paul has indicated he has no problems taking money from white supremacist organizations and I agree with him in that regard. He cannot control who decides to donate to his campaign and he should welcome the money of people who want to support him. This is true of all the candidates. Some donors expect they will get something in return and a problem only arises when they do. If a politician gets a donation and then reciprocates there is a problem. This is how lobbyist scandals occur. The Democrats seem to be a bit better at staying out of trouble for this but many openly do this. Republicans do it and some end up in jail (as they should).

There is a report out from some Neo Nazi website that indicates Ron Paul is one of them and that he attends meetings:

Comrades:

I have kept quiet about the Ron Paul campaign for a while, because I didn’t see any need to say anything that would cause any trouble. However, reading the latest release from his campaign spokesman, I am compelled to tell the truth about Ron Paul’s extensive involvement in white nationalism.

Both Congressman Paul and his aides regularly meet with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review, and others at the Tara Thai restaurant in Arlington, Virginia, usually on Wednesdays. This is part of a dinner that was originally organized by Pat Buchanan, Sam Francis and Joe Sobran, and has since been mostly taken over by the Council of Conservative Citizens.

I have attended these dinners, seen Paul and his aides there, and been invited to his offices in Washington to discuss policy.

For his spokesman to call white racialism a “small ideology” and claim white activists are “wasting their money” trying to influence Paul is ridiculous. Paul is a white nationalist of the Stormfront type who has always kept his racial views and his views about world Judaism quiet because of his political position.

I don’t know that it is necessarily good for Paul to “expose” this. However, he really is someone with extensive ties to white nationalism and for him to deny that in the belief he will be more respectable by denying it is outrageous — and I hate seeing people in the press who denounce racialism merely because they think it is not fashionable.

Bill White, Commander
American National Socialist Workers Party [VNN Forum]

I don’t believe this for one minute though I suppose anything can be true. But logic tells me that this group would not out Paul if they wanted him in the White House (a house name I am sure they relish). If this were true and they outed him he would never be elected and their racist agenda would not be met. Therefore, I just cannot imagine it is true. This guy says he does not know about it being good to out Paul but his whole story lacks good reason. Why would a bunch of white racists meet in a Thai restaurant?

I don’t think Ron Paul is a white supremacist or a racist and this little “outing” did nothing to change that opinion.

***Warning: If you go to the forum you will read vile stuff from disturbed people.***

Big Dog Salute to LGF

Big Dog

Reid Makes Hillary a Hsu in to Cheat

Hillary Clinton has had a bit of trouble with the honesty of her fund raising as indicated by a boy named Hsu as well as other events where she was illegally involved in the process (which was caught on video tape). The Federal Elections Commission has been pretty soft on her by fining one of her cronies for past indiscretions and a federal judge appointed by her husband might be looking the other way on the video tape deal but now it looks like it will not matter.

Harry Reid has decided to violate the Constitution and not allow a vote on four FEC appointments if they include a man named Hans von Spakovsky. Reid has stated that if von Spakovsky’s name is in the mix the Senate will not consider any of the nominees. The job of the President is to nominate people with the advice and consent of the Senate. It is not the Senate’s job to decide on who they will and will not vote on, it is its job to advise and consent. If they do not like the nominee then they are free to vote against the conformation.

This is an issue that will not likely be resolved in the near future and certainly not before the early primary caucuses and elections in January. This means that the candidates will have little or no oversight from the FEC. We have already seen what the Clintons do when there is oversight so it is not hard to imagine what they would be capable of if the oversight is lacking.

The Democrats in Congress have been an abysmal failure and there are only two reasons they just passed spending bills. They do not want to go home without passing the bills because they criticized the Republican majority for doing so last year and they just want to go home and enjoy their month long Christmas vacation. Harry Reid is an absolute failure and he could not lead a group of people out of a burning building.

Our Senators need to remember their place and do their damned jobs. The President runs the country. Senators serve their states so Harry Reid is not in a position to dictate the way the country runs and he is certainly not in a position to violate the Constitution because he does not like a person the President has nominated.

Source:
The Politico

Did Students Also Suck up Government Benefits?

A Spanish teacher in Ohio has her students conduct a role playing exercise where she has them assume an identity of a Latino and try to apply to enter the US legally. She then stamps all their papers DENIED and tells them to figure out how to get in ILLEGALLY. This is supposed to be an eye opening experience that teaches empathy as each student goes to local businesses and asks for applications that are written in Spanish and then tries to figure out how to live here and make a living as an ILLEGAL.

The teacher, Erica Vieyra, feels that immigration is one of the most important problems of our time and she believes that by teaching these students to have empathy they might make a difference when they grow up and become voters and possibly lawmakers. I wonder why this teacher did not have them go to the government assistance offices and figure out ways to bilk the US taxpayer out of money? Perhaps she could have had the girls get pregnant and drop a jackpot baby here so it would be given the status of citizen and guarantee generations of other family members entering to ride the baby’s coattails. Maybe she could have had them apply for college at great tuition rates and then watch as real citizens pay more money, no doubt to offset the handouts to ILLEGALS.

I think this teacher should have focused on teaching her students how to obey the law rather than to break it. Imagine a business teacher telling students to apply for a job and then denying it only to inform the student to get it illegally, by forging documents. Perhaps the business teacher could give an assignment for students to already have a job and they have to make a million dollars and when they don’t he teaches them how to do it illegally.

Perhaps someone should teach this teacher how to stop blaming the United States for the ILLEGAL acts of immigrants. They have a hard time because they break the law. They have no regard for the law and they expect people to ignore their activities as if they are entitled to a life here. This is our house and we get to say who enters and who does not.

I wonder how this teacher would react if a student who was failing her class broke into the school computer and changed his grades so he would pass? That is the lesson she is teaching…

Source:
The Columbus Dispatch

Big Dog

Others with similar items:
Outside the Beltway, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Mark My Words, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Adam’s Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao’s Blog, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Chuck Adkins, The Pet Haven, Conservative Cat, Faultline USA, third world county, Allie is Wired, DragonLady’s World, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, Wolf Pangloss, Right Voices, and OTB Sports, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Don’t Take Flight 93 to Mecca 12-19-2007

Sample8

TBogg’s phony excuse for the deleted Flight 93 document

Slight language warning, with Clinton-Lewinski analogy (4th section).

TBogg has posted an explanation for how Kevin Jaques’ assessment of the Flight 93 Memorial went missing from one of his comment threads. Sometime following “the Infamous Alec Rawls Comment Thread,” says TBogg:

… after I was done picking up the beer cans, cigarette butts, and the assorted discarded underwear, I switched from Blogspot comments to Haloscan. In the process, all of the previous comment threads were lost…

Fortunately through the miracle of intertubes nerdiness the Lost Commentinent has been rediscovered and you can go read them here.

TBogg insinuates that the Holoscan snafu is the reason that the restored comment thread is missing the Jaques comment, but he does not actually say it, and for good reason. The Jaques deletion had nothing to do with any comment system switchover.

A commentator at Alec’s Error Theory blog looked up TBogg’s site on the Wayback Machine. Turns out that Wayback was taking snapshots of Tbogg’s comment threads every week. Only Blogspot comments show up on Wayback, but that is all that is needed to tell the tale.

Throughout the period in question (spring and summer of 2006) all of TBogg’s Blogspot comment threads are stable except for the “infamous” one, which actually exhibits quite a bit of activity. Not only did TBogg hand delete Jaques comment, but he was apparently torn about it, changing his mind a number of times over a period of weeks.

Background, for those who don’t know what Kevin Jaques did

It is not known exactly when Kevin Jaques was asked by the Memorial Project to write an assessment of Alec Rawls’s warnings about Islamic and terrorist memorializing features in the Crescent of Embrace design. Most likely he wrote it in late March of 2006, just before he posted it at the end of TBogg’s January 6, 2006 comment thread.

(If anyone wants to look, go open up the March 31st snapshot of TBogg’s site, then find the January 06 archive page. The Lunacy Abounds post is about a third of the way up from the bottom. Click on the permalink and the comment thread will appear, with the Jaques comment at the bottom. In the previous snapshot, March 28th, the Jaques comment has not yet shown up. Ditto for earlier dates.)

The Jaques comment is important because it shows the blatant dishonesty of the Park Service’s internal investigation. Jaques acknowledged that the giant Mecca-oriented crescent at the center of the design is similar to the Mecca direction indicator (called a mihrab) around which every mosque is built, then he told the Park Service not to worry because no one has ever seen seen a mihrab anywhere near this big before:

Thirdly, most mihrabs are small, rarely larger than the figure of a man, although some of the more ornamental ones can be larger, but nothing as large at the crescent found in the site design. It is unlikely that most Muslims would walk into the area of the circle/crescent and see a mihrab because it is well beyond their limit of experience. Again, just because it is similar does not make it the same.

The Park Service has released excerpts from Jaques’ comment, proving that the TBogg comment comes from Jaques, but it has never released the revealing parts, like where Jaques says not to worry because one has ever seen a mihrab this big before.

How to get rid of the body? TBogg has second, third and fourth thoughts

TBogg is THE source for the full text of Jaques’ analysis, with its blatant excuse-making for the giant mihrab. Having this analysis publicly available was a problem, both for Jaques and for the Park Service. Since TBogg had no way of knowing that on his own, it seems that somebody must have contacted him, because in the July 21, 2006 snapshot of Tbogg’s Lunacy Abounds comment thread, the Jaques comment is missing from the end.

Blogger allows blog administrators to hide and show comment threads, and it allows them to delete individual comments. Blogger also allows people who comment non-anonymously to delete their own comments. Jaques left his comment anonymously, so only a blog administrator could have deleted his comment. Unless TBogg got hacked, that would have been TBogg.

The August 21st snapshot of the Lunacy Abounds post shows TBogg having another thought. Here the entire Lunacy Abounds comment thread is hidden, while all the other comment threads on the archive page remain visible. (About half the posts in Wayback’s August 21st snapshot of TBogg’s January 2006 archive page do not have working permalinks, but of the pages that do come up individually, only Lunacy Abounds has the comment thread hidden.)

If “all of the previous comment threads were lost,” that was a separate incident. The archival record shows that a blog administrator went in and turned off the Lunacy Abounds comment thread by hand. Again, unless TBogg got hacked (or the Wayback Machine is wacked), that was TBogg.

Of course TBogg did not say anything about getting hacked. He insinuated that Haloscan is the culprit. Nope. Haloscan is innocent. Does TBogg want to try pointing the finger anywhere else?

On August 28, 2006, the “infamous comment thread” reappears, again without the Jaques comment. Wayback doesn’t have TBogg snapshots for 2007, but for most of this year the comment thread was again turned off (the Haloscan snafu?), until sometime recently TBogg himself retrieved the comment thread (without the Jaques comment) from the wayback machine and linked it to his original Lunacy Abounds post.

Not quite Hamlet. TBogg consistently wants the Jaques comment “not to be.” He just can’t decide how he wants it not to be.

TBogg’s Monica Lewinsky choice

To complete his Clintonian deception, TBogg makes an over the top admission, pretending it is all a joke:

So, yes. I have been busted. I’ve been getting more payoffs than Bill Bennett with a roll of nickels at Circus Circus. Between George Soros and Osama bin Laden I’ve received so many Miatas, that some of them are still sitting around in the blister packs.

At least he makes it amusing, but the joke is on the Bogglings. TBogg actually meant the “I have been busted” part.

Will TBogg’s legions of vitriolic followers take this Clintonian lie kneeling down? What’s it going to be TBoggers: spit or swallow?

TBogg will have to suffer some embarrassment for duping his readers, but so what? The man embarrasses himself every day. The important thing is that he is in a position to actually be of help in exposing the cover up of Islamic and terrorist memorializing features in the Flight 93 memorial.

Who contacted him? What did they say? Did he knuckle to a plea from Jaques alone, or was he actually contacted by the government?

TBogg could well have been duped himself. Maybe someone at the Park Service told him that this was an internal government document that was not supposed to be available to the public and asked if he could please remove it. Now that he knows a) that the Park Service is accused of perpetrating a cover up, and b) how the document that he himself covered up contains clear examples of dishonest excuse making, TBogg is in the same position as his army of Bogglings. He knows that he has been used.

Is he going to swallow it, or spit it out? Spit TBogg. You’ll feel much better in the morning.

Can’t we all just be against planting a terrorist memorial mosque on the Flight 93 crash site?

There is no reason for a left-right divide over the Flight 93 Memorial. It isn’t the critics of the crescent design that politicized the issue, but the defenders of the crescent, starting with newspapers like the Pittsburgh Post Gazette that knew about the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent back in 2005 and decided not to publish it. They were too busy using their editorial page to slam critics of the crescent as right wing bigots. Inconvenient facts could not be allowed to interfere with their chosen story line.

Then there are people like TBogg who politicize everything. Instead of checking the facts, he starts with his presumptions about which side he should be on, then looks for smarmy ways to characterize the opposition. That is not a rational thought process, but he can more than redeem himself if he will just stop deceiving everybody and start helping to expose the facts.

He could also give his moron brigades a chance to redeem themselves by asking them to actually check a couple factual claims about the crescent design:

Is the giant crescent is really oriented almost exactly on Mecca?

Is the 9/11 date really inscribed on a separate section of Memorial Wall that is centered on the bisector of the giant crescent, placing it in the exact position of the star on an Islamic crescent and star flag?

Is it true that every particle of the original Crescent of Embrace design remains completely intact in the so-called redesign?

This is what the blogosphere OUGHT to be good for. If TBogg is too busy to check the facts, why not put his minions to work?

For more on who TBogg has been covering up for, see last week’s post on Dr. Jaques 2001 article, where he argued that we should formulate our response to the 9/11 attacks in accordance with sharia law. How did this advocate for Islamic supremacism become the Memorial Project’s sole consultant on the warnings of Islamic symbolism in the crescent design during a crucial period when the Project’s dismissive posture was set in stone?

If TBogg would tell us what he knows, it might help answer that question, or pose others equally important. No more deception. Just tell the damned truth.

Stop the Memorial Blogburst

1389 Blog – Antijihadist Tech
A Defending Crusader
A Fine Line Between Stupid and Clever
And Rightly So
Big Dog’s Weblog
Big Sibling
Cao2’s Weblog
Cao’s Blog
Chaotic Synaptic Activity
Error Theory
Faultline USA
Flanders Fields
Flopping Aces
Four Pointer
Freedom’s Enemies
Ft. Hard Knox
GM’s Corner
Hoosier Army Mom
Ironic Surrealism II
Jack Lewis
Kender’s Musings
My Own Thoughts
Nice Deb
Ogre’s Politics and Views
Part-Time Pundit
Right on the Right
Right Truth
Stix Blog
Stop the ACLU
The Renaissance Biologist
The View From the Turret
The Wide Awakes
Thunder Run