Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Wikileaks is at it again:
This, released a couple of days ago...
WikiLeaks emails reveal Bill Clinton’s $1M ‘birthday’ present from Qatar
Thousands of emails leaked by Wiki Leaks founder Julian Assange’s nonprofit organization continue to embarrass Democrat presidential hopeful Mrs. Clinton. The latest email thread shows an aide discussing conversations with ambassadors from Qatar, Brazil, Peru, Malawi, and Rwanda while in the nation’s capital.
“[Qatar] would like to see WJC ‘for five minutes’ in NYC, to present $1 million check that Qatar promised for WJC’s birthday in 2011,” an employee at The Clinton Foundationsaid to numerous aides, including Doug Brand. “Qatar would welcome our suggestions for investments in Haiti — particularly on education and health. They have allocated most of their $20 million but are happy to consider projects we suggest. I’m collecting input from CF Haiti team.”
The documents, which U.S. intelligence blames on Russian state actors, are just a few of roughly 50,000 Wiki Leaks says it has on Mr. Podesta.
Mr. Podesta’s leaked conversations come on the heels of an ABC News story on special attention Mrs. Clinton’s State Department gave to emails identifying “FO Bs” (friends of Bill Clinton), after the 2010 Haiti earthquake.
“I think when you look at both the State Department and the Clinton Foundation in Haiti, that line was pretty faint between the two,” Jake Johnston, a Haiti analyst for the nonpartisan Center for Economic and Policy Research, told the network Tuesday. “You had a lot of coordination and connection between the two, obviously. And I think that raises significant questions about how they were both operating.”
Wike Leaks released a new batch of Mr. Podesta’s emails Thursday, indicating that it would draw out its supply for maximum political effect going into the home stretch of the U.S. presidential election.
As far as I can tell, the offer was made, but no-one can verify whether or not it was accepted, and - even if it was - there's no evidence Qatar benefited in any way from the donation.
...Has morphed into this....
Email About Qatari Offer Shows Thorny Ethical Issues Clinton Foundation Faced
While it is unclear whether that meeting ever took place, the offer, mentioned in one of thousands of hacked Clinton campaign emails released by Wiki Leaks last week, was an example of the complex ethical issues the Clinton Foundation faced in managing relationships with foreign governments when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. It also raised questions about whether the foundation had fully followed procedures it had voluntarily agreed to in order to avoid those very issues.
The foundation’s ties to foreign governments and financiers have long been fodder for Mrs. Clinton’s critics — chief among them Donald J. Trump — who contend that foreigners used donations to the foundation to curry favor with the Clintons while Mrs. Clinton was the country’s top diplomat.
Emails released this year from Mrs. Clinton’s time at the State Department showed that foundation donors sought and in some cases obtained meetings with department officials. None showed that Mrs. Clinton made decisions based on contributions to the foundation, and the Clinton campaign has said she never did.
But the appearance of special access was enough that the foundation announced this summer that if Mrs. Clinton is elected president, the foundation will cease accepting foreign donations.
Similar concerns were in the air in 2009, when Mrs. Clinton took office as secretary of state. So the foundation agreed then that it would ask the State Department to review donations from any new foreign government donors, or from existing donors that were looking to expand their giving significantly.
A State Department spokesman, Mark C. Toner, said on Saturday, “We do not have a record of a submission” from the Clinton Foundation related to a 2012 donation from Qatar.
In a hacked email from April 2012 released by Wiki Leaks last week, Amitabh Desai, the Clinton Foundation’s foreign policy director, wrote to senior foundation aides that he had recently met with ambassadors from several nations, including Qatar, while in Washington.
Referring to Mr. Clinton by his initials, he wrote that Qatar “would like to see WJC ‘for five minutes’ in NYC, to present $1 million check that Qatar promised for WJC’s birthday in 2011.” He also said that Qatari officials “would welcome our suggestions for investments in Haiti” and that they have “allocated most of their $20 million but are happy to consider projects we suggest.”
Qatar had donated to the foundation since 2002. The country, a tiny oil-rich Persian Gulf monarchy, has a complicated diplomatic relationship with the United States; it is an ally, but it has also been suspected of quietly supporting militant Islamic groups.
Clinton Foundation officials said Saturday that they did not have to clear the $1 million gift with the State Department because it was not a “material increase” from Qatar’s previous donation levels.
The claim, however, was impossible to verify because the foundation is not required to publicly report every donation it receives and has not done so.
“Qatar has been among our hundreds of thousands of donors who have supported the Clinton Foundation’s overall humanitarian work, including making lifesaving H.I.V./AIDS treatment available to millions of people in more than 70 countries, combating childhood obesity here in the United States and working to empower girls and women around the world,” said Craig Minassian, a spokesman for the foundation.
edited 16th Oct '16 6:13:46 AM by Wyldchyld
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.I think the Obamas might end up in the same category as Jimmy Carter, where they technically aren't elected officials, but they hang around helping the party out. Especially since Michelle and Barack are both incredibly good speakers.
Although, one of the Obama daughters (I don't remember which one) is apparently really interested in politics. I wouldn't be surprised if she pops up in an election at some point.
![]()
![]()
Is there a full transcript of the email or is the Washington Times
doing its thing again?
edited 16th Oct '16 6:11:34 AM by Krieger22
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiotI think it's doing its thing again. The more recent story it's morphed into is whether or not the Clinton Foundation is ethical and breaking its own rules (see the second article I've linked to in that post by the New York Times).
Basically, they can't seem to find evidence of it being accepted or any benefits being offered in return (or prior) to the donation, so they're trying to undermine the reputation of the foundation instead.
However, the Foundation has confirmed that Qatar has made donation in the past, and that most countries have at some point or other.
I can't find a full transcript of the email without going onto Wikileaks, which I refuse to do. Reading between the lines, I don't particularly trust this story.
edited 16th Oct '16 6:17:52 AM by Wyldchyld
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.It seems like all of the attempts to smear the Clintons have kind of backfired in a way. There's so much sensationalist exaggerated crap out there that any real controversial stuff is...pretty underwhelming by comparison.
Besides, HRC seems better prepared to handle this crap since she actually prepares for it. Unlike Trump, who refused to let his staff do research on his own past.
edited 16th Oct '16 6:20:42 AM by M84
Disgusted, but not surprisedSide question: Anyone seen Bulworth? There are definitely parallels between Jay Bulworth's campaign and the Trump campaign.
Not really a matter of "not being the best", but the man has such deep issues that he can't handle the thought of "appearing weak" to anyone, whether they are his equals or people serving him. Even if it is quite obvious it would be useful to him - at least his team would have been ready for all the dirty stuff that got dug from his past.
From a clinical point of view, Trump is quite fascinating. Too bad he risks screwing the lives of millions of people. He is a textbook example of toxic masculinity, for starters.
edited 16th Oct '16 8:47:01 AM by Julep
From what I've seen, he seems incapable of admitting he's made a mistake of any kind. He doesn't even seem to conceptualise the idea of him being able to make a mistake. He therefore wouldn't support things like opposition research because that requires being able to comprehend that you've done something - anything - that opponents might be able to use against you. If he can't/won't even conceptualise that, then he won't ever get as far as supporting the concept of opposition research, let alone permitting it to happen. It is fascinating.
edited 16th Oct '16 8:51:38 AM by Wyldchyld
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.But when you are wrapped up in the idea that you are perfect, you won't bother with people researching your past - because you're perfect, so what would it change to have people examine it? On the contrary I think Trump's behavior displays many signs of insecurity (that's pretty much the entire point of Bloomberg's speech at the DNC). Hence why he didn't want anyone to dig in his past: he knew (consciously or not) that it sucked and that it would make him appear weak, and that is an idea he abhors.
I watched a documentary recently about Trump (it's not a recent document, however). It was done almost entirely from the point of view of his aeroplane staff, what their jobs are and what it's like to work for Trump. I got a couple of things from it:
- Trump doesn't care what he puts his staff through, or any organisation or infrastructure, to ensure his desires are met. His pilots can go for more than 24 hours without sleep because he keeps constantly changing his plans at the very last minute and expecting his pilots to keep accommodating them without breaks. Airports can find their schedules scrambled because he will turn up to take off hours later than he's supposed to (one airport was a minute away from evening shut down when he finally showed up to get on his plane). Annual health-and-safety checks and refits of the plane barely get done in time because he never permits proper scheduling of them (they do get done because the staff and companies break themselves to get it done).
- He is very much style over substance or practicality. His plane is his plane because of its size and who has owned it in the past, not because it's a sensible plane to have for what he uses it for. He has custom engines because he has certain beliefs about the reputation of those engines, despite the fact they're actually quite old and dated technology. He has white leather upholstery, but expects it to never show even a speck of dust or dirt (the pilot ends up going through the plane with a toothbrush to ensure this).
- It's his way or the high way and his top paid staff enforce that on all companies they deal with. He exists very much in a bubble that bears no resemblance to the real world which is why staff, companies and infrastructure (such as airports) work in an environment that's basically a never-ending scramble because anything he wants he has to have the second he snaps his fingers, and his whims change frequently and unpredictably - causing a domino effect of chaos down his own staff and the companies he's doing business with. He is either not aware of, or doesn't care about, what he puts his staff, companies, airports, etc. through. His staff make sure he never hears about how inconvenienced he makes them or their jobs - not complaining is part of the job.
edited 16th Oct '16 9:27:43 AM by Wyldchyld
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.Those staff admitted that they get very, very well-paid. I just personally believe no amount of money is worth it. What I did take away from the documentary is that there are an awful lot of staff and companies who make Trump and his businesses actually work. He's very proud of his reputation and brand name, but he doesn't seem to be the person who is actually putting in the hours to maintain either. His staff are the ones doing that for him and the salary is the only acknowledgement they get.
He's big on loyalty though. He does seem to think that if anyone has ever done anything for him or his business resulting in him paying them even once, that they somehow owe him for the rest of their lives. That's probably why he's been so batshit in some of these campaign interviews when he's gone off-topic to rant about people daring to criticise him when they've talked about how they've been treated when doing business for him.
edited 16th Oct '16 9:37:48 AM by Wyldchyld
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.
And yet he has a reputation for not paying people that he hires — usually temps and contractors. I guess his permanent staff have their loyalty cemented by depending on him exclusively for their livelihood, and to hell with those who don't owe him their first-born...
edited 16th Oct '16 9:44:48 AM by pwiegle
This Space Intentionally Left Blank.

That's a feature, not a bug.