President Pay-to-Play

Collectivists, but especially collectivist elites, hate capitalism – I mean real capitalism, where the people involved in a transaction do so of their own free will and without any government coercion or theft to influence the deal – because it limits their opportunity for graft. I don’t think that it is a coincidence that it was during the presidency of Bill Clinton that we started not only offshoring so much American manufacturing and know-how, often with the Clintons making big money from it. Do you remember the Chinese military contribution to Bill’s campaign that gave China access to both nuclear technology and critical missile technology to accurately deliver the nukes under the guise of trade? Several decades of expensive R&D and close to a trillion dollar of technology and know-how went to China for a measly $2 million to Bills campaign.

We should have known then that this was the direction America was heading in. I don’t think it is a coincidence that the sector making the most money today is the one that sells favors. And revelations like this one, clarify why that is the case:

I wouldn’t want to be standing too close to this Doug Band guy anytime soon, especially not before the election Nov. 8.

Another thing I wouldn’t want to do is have to write a life insurance policy for Doug Band. In case you haven’t been paying much attention to the inner workings of the Clinton Foundation as detailed in the WikiLeaks dumps, Doug Band’s role is summed up nicely in this headline from the L.A. Times:

“An aide says he once arranged for $50 million in payments for Bill Clinton.”

Fifty million! And now it’s all laid out, in public documents, by Doug Band himself. Far, far beyond a reasonable doubt, if you want to get technical about it. Even James Comey could make this case — but he wants to keep breathing, too.

These latest leaks really do explain the whole breathtaking pay-to-play aspect of the Clinton Foundation. Band is bragging about his prowess as an extortionist, although he prefers to call it “the unorthodox nature of our roles.” But he does point out with some pride that his shakedowns, I mean charitable outreaches on behalf of Bill Clinton, “guided more than $30 million for him personally, with $66 million to be paid out over the next nine years.”

Wow! Whatever happened to, “Never write when you can speak, never speak when you can nod, never nod when you can wink”?

These people didn’t just write it down, they emailed it out, on unsecure servers.

Amazing enough that the mobsters running this racketeering enterprise are totally out in the open, not even bothering with masks. But the outfit’s capo, or consigliere, is the odds-on favorite to become the next president of the United States.

Everybody trying to understand this Clinton Foundation grift is asking themselves, “How come nobody ever thought of this kind of mega-scam before?”

My answer would be, earlier racketeers dreamed of such a grift, but they quickly realized they could never get away with it. They would have been locked up faster than Al Capone or Whitey Bulger.

But these are the Clintons. They make the Kennedys seem law-abiding. And we are no longer in “America,” we live in a banana republic, where everything is for sale, from the top down.

Our new money making economy is no longer about making things of value, but about selling favors, shuffling around paper at a huge cost, and in general paying off grievance mongers and their ilk. Basically what we now have an elite class that fleeces us all. They make massive amounts of money trading favors and blowing massive amounts of tax payer money on bureaucratic morass while the rest of us that still are productive get told we need to give up even more of what we make so they can keep doing what they are doing.

Trump may be a douche, but the Clintons are fucking criminals of the highest order. And all the focus on the bullshit about Trump being a poor candidate or running a poor campaign, the fantasies that other candidates would have done better, or the concern that Trump is a dirty talker, whatever your real motive for attacking him while ignoring the fact the Clintons make him look like a boy scout, only serves to help usher in an even more incompetent presidency than that of Obama.

Ask yourself why this campaign is about Trumps inadequacies and not about the issues and the Clintons corruption. If your take on it is that’s Trumps fault, then you are a dupe. Yes, you are. You either have been manipulated by a corrupt and beholden media and social machine into ignoring the obvious and focusing on irrelevancies, or you are holding a grudge and as people driven by emotions always do, make a an impulse driven mistake. Yeah, most of us might not like Trump, but cutting your nose off to spite your face, and handing Clinton the presidency is a bad idea. That is unless you like what is going on today and have convinced yourself this is all good, or is better than a Trump presidency, for some reason only you fathom, and that it all wont blow up in our face. Of course, if you are one of those idiots, then appeals to logic and facts matter little to you anyway. Me, I want the establishment that exists today to die an ugly death for what they have done. Both parties are corrupt.

Comments are closed.

  1. Hal_10000

    The Clinton corruption has been talked about a lot.  This was front page on multiple news fronts (here is a non-hysterical writeup from the WaPo).  In reality, this is not “criminal” in the legal sense. What the Clintons specialize in is in doing stuff that doesn’t quite break the law, but is sleazy and on the border.

    This is a perfect example. The Clinton Foundation itself is clean — an A-rated charity that gives 90+% of its money to good causes.  It’s everything around it that’s garbage.  It’s the pay-to-play scheme where:

    1) rich person donates money to Clinton Foundation (which doesn’t benefit the Clintons personally).

    2) rich person also gives money to the Clintons personally for “speeches” and “leadership”

    3) Clinton as SecState does stuff for them. And I am sure they will expect payback once she’d President.

    Unfortunately, none of this is illegal unless there is an explicit quid-pro-quo. The libs have been drawing a comparison to Bush getting big speaking fees but that’s a garbage comparison because neither Bush nor his wife are running for President. This is basically bribery in advance.

    while ignoring the fact the Clintons make him look like a boy scou

    See, but this is where you lose me. The Clintons do not make Trump look like a boy scout. If anything, he makes the Clintons look better.  He’s even more corrupt, even more dishonest, even more petty and vindictive. You’re just so consumed by Clinton hate that you can’t see that.

    Thumb up 2

  2. richtaylor365

    non-hysterical writeup 

    Alex, this is how it works, link to a [supposedly] more reasonable source, the Washington Post and you are described as “non-hysterical”, your source was just too “hysterical” for those more open minded, get it?

    This is a perfect example. The Clinton Foundation itself is clean — an A-rated charity that gives 90+% of its money to good causes.

    And some consider you a Clinton shill, banish the thought;

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/16/just-5-7-percent-of-clinton-foundation-budget-actually-went-to-charity/

    http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/16/clinton-foundation-spent-6-percent-charitable-grants-2014/

    Even a generous source touts it at about 15%

    And since you mentioned Bush;

    He’s even more corrupt, even more dishonest, even more petty and vindictive.

    Facts not in evidence, the “more” part, anyway. I will agree that nobody can make Trump look like a boy scout, but this post really was not about Trump, was it?

    See, this is where you lose me, it is possible to spotlight Hillary’s shortcomings, her lying, her deceit, her shady business dealings, her unethical behavior, even her disqualifications from even being a decent human being, it is possible to bring up all these things without comparing her to and placing her on the scale with Trump. And it it is also possible to recognize these things without being marginalized (and labelled a kook) by dismissing all that as “consumed by Clinton hate”.

     

     

     

    Thumb up 0

  3. AlexInCT *

    The Clinton corruption has been talked about a lot. 

    Really? Where and when? And how are stories like this one not front and center? Please, you are full of it, and you know it.

    Practically all coverage from the DNC operatives with bylines either tries to convince people that there was no criminal activity – that it all was part of a desperate vast right wing conspiracy that is making this all up, or tried to convince you that because every corrupt and compromised government agency provided cover instead of doing their jobs there is no serious corruption worthy of worry – that there is nothing there. That is NOT covering the story.

    If they had really covered the level of corruption and criminal activity involved here, Hillary would be wearing an orange jumpsuit & making license plates, or in court right now under indictment, with Obama facing impeachment and run out of office for doing far worse than Nixon could dream off, and not running for POTUS.

    Trump might be a terrible candidate, but compared to Hillary he is a saint. And yet, here you and so many others are complaining about Trump while giving Hillary a pass. And yes, you are giving her a pass.

    Thumb up 0

  4. AlexInCT *

    This is a perfect example. The Clinton Foundation itself is clean — an A-rated charity that gives 90+% of its money to good causes.

    That was an attempt at sarcasm right? You do know that just recently, after the recent hurricane that the left exaggerated so much about did damage to Haiti, their PM worried about the Clinton foundation coming back to rip them off yet again?

    The only people claiming that the Clinton foundation is anything but a UN-level corrupt entity that allow the Clintons to sell favors for cash are Clinton hacks. You again prove you are one of those people.

    Thumb up 0

  5. AlexInCT *

    So you miss the point that this is obviously Comey being a smart bastard and making sure he can either give Trump a report to go after Hillary with, or Hillary a report that will absolve her, after on January 20th next year, escapes you?

    It seems that the only way to get justice is to elect someone other than a democrat.

    Thumb up 0

  6. West Virginia Rebel

    The Clintons are grifters of the first rank; the question is whether or not they can ever be prosecuted for it.

    Meanwhile, it looks like Carlos Danger may be having the last laugh against Hillary and his ex-wife…

    Thumb up 0

  7. Hal_10000

    Tell me something, Rich and Alex: do you guys ever get tired of being full of shit? Do you ever get tired of linking to sites like the Daily Caller only to find out they’re feeding a load of manure? Do you ever get tired of living an alternative reality?

    Because here are the facts. The Clinton Foundation itself does not give out grants. It provides services directly.  This is not unusual. The Armstrong Foundation does not give out grants.  Nor do many other charities.

     

    <blockquote>“Although it has ‘foundation’ in its name, the Clinton Foundation is actually a public charity,” Brian Mittendorf, a professor of accounting at Ohio State University’s Fisher College of Business, wrote in the Chronicle of Philanthropy. “In practical terms, this means both that it relies heavily on donations from the public and that it achieves its mission primarily by using those donations to conduct direct charitable activities, as opposed to providing grants from an endowment.

    “Failure to understand the difference led to the widespread claim (covered by the New York PostRush LimbaughFox News, and others) that only a small portion of Clinton Foundation spending goes toward charity. While measuring charitable endeavors by the amount of grants awarded may be appropriate for many private foundations, it is not for an organization that acts as a direct service provider like the Clinton Foundation.”</blockquote>

    See, this is why I tend to rely on people who know what the fuck they are talking about like … the people who rate charities for a living, not some columnist at the Daily Caller who looked at a tax return.  But I’m sure Politifact, Charity Navigator and Charitwatch are all in on the conspiracy.

    I’m well aware that the Clintons are garbage. Alex’s specific point was that they make Trump look like a boy scout. I was a boy scout. If we’d had someone like Trump, we’d have thrown him in the lake.

    Thumb up 1

  8. AlexInCT *

    Tell me something, Rich and Alex: do you guys ever get tired of being full of shit? 

    I think you should ask yourself that question, lib.

    Because here are the facts.

    Hah hah hah.. Politifact? Seriously? Shit you should have just linked to Huffington Post or some other lefty rag. Heck, These scumbags are such a bunch of DNC operatives with bylines, that someone had to put a site together to call them on their bullshit. Do you ever believe these scumbags would tell the truth about the corrupt Clintons? Any republican that had an organization that does what the Clintons do would already be in jail. These people make Abhramov look decent by comparison.

    I will take my facts from others that are not beholden to the Clintons, like this one.

    Thumb up 0

  9. Hal_10000

    Yes, Alex, but you again missed the salient point because of your conspiracy theory bullshit. Politifact asked someone who actually investigates charities.  Let me walk through that very slowly. Politifact did not make that judgement themselves. They asked someone who job it is to investigate and rate charities. Multiple watchdogs have concluded the same. But sure, I’ll try insane alt-right trolls at Breitbart. This is classic diversion: you’re completely dead wrong on the facts so attack the source of the facts. What are facts? What is reality?

    And I never denied there was a pay for play. I’ve said it many times. What I have also said is that the Foundation itself does good work, which every single investigator has concluded that it does. The only people who dispute that are crazed conspiracy mongers who found an IRS form and don’t know what the hell they’re reading.  It’s all the crap around the foundation that’s bad.

    (And I always know when you’re deep in the fever swamp when you call me liberal. Because your conservatism is entirely defined by conspiracy theories and hatred of Democrats.  Anyone who doesn’t dive into that swamp, regardless of their beliefs in small government is a librul.)

    Thumb up 1

  10. richtaylor365

    Tell me something, Rich and Alex: do you guys ever get tired of being full of shit? 

    A little touchy today, are we? What, this new FBI investigation making you a bit nervous?

    My links use actual IRS documents. And I would not get too cozy about the Charity Navigator recommendation, it appears they have been in bed together for many years, hard to be objective when you do business together scratching each others back.

    And for your politifact rebuttal, here is a rebuttal to that rebuttal;

    The problem here is not one of facts or accuracy, but ideology. Jacobson simply doesn’t like the implications of the fact that the Clinton Foundation spent less than 10 percent of its budgets on charitable grants in 2013. He doesn’t like the fact that the two single largest “charitable” initiatives of the Clinton Foundation — by its own admission — are the Clinton Presidential Library, which exists solely to put a positive spin on the 42nd president’s term in office, and the Clinton Global Initiative, which the New York Timescharacterized as a “glitzy annual gathering of chief executives, heads of state, and celebrities.” If hanging out with celebrities at glitzy dinners is the height of charity, then it’s time to beatify the Kardashian sisters.

    So, I guess if I donate big bucks to the RichTaylor  Porn Library or the Rich Taylor Global Study on the Benifits of Beer Consumption and float Charity Navigator free yearly membership, I can garner a 4 out of 4 stars from them as well.

    I’m well aware that the Clintons are garbage.

    Yeah, I think you are, now work on this lesson; when describing the stink factor of 2 skunks, describing one as particularly smelly does not make the other smell better.

     

    Thumb up 0

  11. AlexInCT *

    I suspect Comey will sit on these until after the election, at which point whomever wins will get them all, but it already looks like we are finding out why Hillary had the server wiped with a cloth: That corrupt foundation of hers Hal for some ungodly reason feels compelled to still defend…

    Thumb up 0