Red herring going around: "the Clintons did not use the Foundation to personally enrich themselves, therefore none of this is a real issue"
-
-
Then again, they did reap certain material benefits under the Foundation's auspices -- plane rides, etc. But that's an ancillary issue.
-
is it? More people live on less than $10 a day. Access to that kind of convenience has ridiculous value. The vulgarity is unreal.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
with this + email setup, it's that quasi gov thing you were getting at that's a big prob.; it's a restructuring of fundamental gov
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Her opponent, however, is one of those "few" people saying personal enrichment is the main problem.
-
I have the luxury of not having to endorse Trump's interpretative scheme in order to point out Clinton flaws.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Make no mistake. Hillary's team actively sought out humanitarian missions to align with Bill's "diplomatic" endeavors.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
From another perspective it's simple though...how did two people who spent their entire careers in public service get so rich?
-
If I may nitpick, Hillary didn't spend her entire career in public service http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/video_hillary_clinton_in_1990_im_proud_of_walmart_20150525 … as 1st lady in Arkansas
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
People keep looking for an explicit quid pro quo...it's more complex/subtle than that. The Clintons aren't stupid.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.