• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records[W:34]

Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

No, he doesn't. He has had consensual affairs, that is not the same thing as drugging and raping dozens of women.

Not according to Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey.
 
Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

Not according to Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey.

And Paula Jones.

Okay, if you can find 48 more, then i might consider the claim that Cosby and Clinton have the same number of accusations.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

And Paula Jones.

Okay, if you can find 48 more, then i might consider the claim that Cosby and Clinton have the same number of accusations.

Guess what, its wrong whether its 2 or its 20.

When the guy was the President and a governor and had affairs with subordinates, its hard to find the line where consensual begins and ends.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

And Paula Jones.

Okay, if you can find 48 more, then i might consider the claim that Cosby and Clinton have the same number of accusations.

I never made that claim. In fact, I don't recall mentioning Crosby on here in months, and never in the same context as Clinton.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

Guess what, its wrong whether its 2 or its 20.

When the guy was the President and a governor and had affairs with subordinates, its hard to find the line where consensual begins and ends.

It may be true that it's wrong either way. Unfortunately, someone like President Bill Clinton has a lot of enemies who are happy to smear his name. So there is a potential conflict of interest for calling him out. Note that Broaddrick was close friends with the Clintons after the alleged rape, she never filed any criminal charges, she later claimed she stayed quiet because of fear for her life, however she came forward with her accusations in 1999 when President Clinton was President of the United States...

She also filed a sworn affidavit that he made no sexual advances. She later recanted that affidavit. When she was allegedly raped by President Clinton, she lied to her current husband, but supposedly told the man she was having an affair with, who became her next husband, about the encounter.

Suffice it to say, while i am saddened by the possibility that Broaddrick's accusations may have merit, she is not a reliable account in this respect. This underscores the need for victims of rape to report their accusers, rather than waiting for republican political hit men like Phillip Yoakum or Susan Carpenter-McMillan.

I often wonder why these victims find republicans to help counsel them in attacking the Clintons, and i can only come up with one plausible explanation.

But, anyway, you may also notice the claim i am responding to is quite specific about the quantity of accusations :

Apparently, it is.

Bill has as many accusations his direction as Bill Cosby, and yet nobody seems to care in the liberal bubble world.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

I never made that claim. In fact, I don't recall mentioning Crosby on here in months, and never in the same context as Clinton.

Yes, i agree, sorry for the confusion. I was not trying to accuse you, i am clarifying my response to the other poster who did seem to make that claim.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

It may be true that it's wrong either way. Unfortunately, someone like President Bill Clinton has a lot of enemies who are happy to smear his name. So there is a potential conflict of interest for calling him out. Note that Broaddrick was close friends with the Clintons after the alleged rape, she never filed any criminal charges, she later claimed she stayed quiet because of fear for her life, however she came forward with her accusations in 1999 when President Clinton was President of the United States...

She also filed a sworn affidavit that he made no sexual advances. She later recanted that affidavit. When she was allegedly raped by President Clinton, she lied to her current husband, but supposedly told the man she was having an affair with, who became her next husband, about the encounter.

Suffice it to say, while i am saddened by the possibility that Broaddrick's accusations may have merit, she is not a reliable account in this respect. This underscores the need for victims of rape to report their accusers, rather than waiting for republican political hit men like Phillip Yoakum or Susan Carpenter-McMillan.

I often wonder why these victims find republicans to help counsel them in attacking the Clintons, and i can only come up with one plausible explanation.

But, anyway, you may also notice the claim i am responding to is quite specific about the quantity of accusations :

I'm sure the party of the person in question has no impact on the quality of the accusations. Let alone multiple accusations. I have a feeling the quality of the accusations would be irrelevant if there were an R after his name, I know it would be irrelevant to the press.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

I'm sure the party of the person in question has no impact on the quality of the accusations. Let alone multiple accusations. I have a feeling the quality of the accusations would be irrelevant if there were an R after his name, I know it would be irrelevant to the press.

When the defendant is of one party, and the PR team of the plaintiffs are consistently of the opposite party, i think most people can connect the idea that political motives might be at play.

President Clinton has affirmed that he has had multiple sexual affairs. That is something that it is absolutely fair to condemn him for.

The accusations of rape are controversial. Further, it seems obvious that Cosby has had far stronger evidence against him, as well as more accusers, than President Clinton.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

Moderator's Warning:
Last I checked this thread was about the Clinton Foundation records and what some financial analyst says about them. Not Clintons or Bill Cosby's alleged sexual affairs. Stick to the topic.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

It would not surprise me to see the Clinton Foundation engaging in some wealth hiding and movement shenanigans.

Me either. However, I'll wait for a much more credible source than the Washington examiner and fox... Reporting on a guy who "alleges" something.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

Why do I always feel the need to shower after reading anything that has to do with Bill and Hillary Clinton?

Cause Bill might have messed up that cute little blue dress of yours? ;)
 
Last edited:
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

One last point. The way the affairs were handled, the way the Benghazi issue has been handled, the way the Clinton foundation issues have been handled all point in one direction---cover up, and wait for the media to lose interest.

Aside from hyper self interest its the defining characteristic of the Clintons.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

Me either. However, I'll wait for a much more credible source than the Washington examiner and fox... Reporting on a guy who "alleges" something.

Reasonable, we should be critical of the source.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

Who hired him to analyze the GE books? Maybe he is one of those most rare curious individuals?

That's a very interesting theory. Do you have information to that effect... or are you just muddying the water with bootless speculation?
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

That's a very interesting theory. Do you have information to that effect... or are you just muddying the water with bootless speculation?

Yes, mine is just a guess. Maybe the analyst was not working for anybody in particular and was just curious. Maybe he did the work on his own?
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

Yes, mine is just a guess. Maybe the analyst was not working for anybody in particular and was just curious. Maybe he did the work on his own?

Yeah... you could be right. Probably just an interested citizen. Good thinking!

Glad we settled that. Now... on to more important stuff: did I tell you I have this beautiful, high-desert, ocean-front, enchanted bridge for sale? Crossing it will give you one wish, each time you pass completely over and back. And it's the most beautiful bridge ever imagined. And I'm letting it go quite inexpensively. Call me.
 
Didn't the foundation also incorrectly classify donations from foreign sources a few years back? I know every election a Clinton has run in they have had illegal foreign donations. Its hard to keep the crooks and their crimes straight
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

Yeah... you could be right. Probably just an interested citizen. Good thinking!

Glad we settled that. Now... on to more important stuff: did I tell you I have this beautiful, high-desert, ocean-front, enchanted bridge for sale? Crossing it will give you one wish, each time you pass completely over and back. And it's the most beautiful bridge ever imagined. And I'm letting it go quite inexpensively. Call me.

Ah yes, the first line of Democrat defense: All bad news is a conspiracy!
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

Yeah... you could be right. Probably just an interested citizen. Good thinking!

Glad we settled that. Now... on to more important stuff: did I tell you I have this beautiful, high-desert, ocean-front, enchanted bridge for sale? Crossing it will give you one wish, each time you pass completely over and back. And it's the most beautiful bridge ever imagined. And I'm letting it go quite inexpensively. Call me.

It's not settled, it is speculation. Unless the man comes forward and tells us why he did this study, we don't know, neither you nor I.

Bridge in the desert? Wishes granted? Thanks dreamer, I'll pass.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

I read the article.

First... it's the Washington Examiner. A news organization not particularly known for 'journalistic integrity'. So I'm skeptical out of the gate... but maybe they've actually got something.

Well, maybe. But not from that article. Lots of suggestions of impropriety. Plenty of innuendo. But no details to speak of from the actual report. And some full-on misrepresentations... which make me even more skeptical. For instance - they describe the analyst, Mr. Ortel, as a 'whistleblower'. There was no suggestion that he was operating with inside knowledge, as would be the case with someone acting as a whistleblower. Maybe he was acting as a 'investigative journalist'. Maybe he's been hired to serve as a 'forensic accountant'. But that sort of overblown, sensationalist, misleading label is but one example of the shoddiness exhibited here.

And - speaking of 'hired' - there was nothing at all about how Mr. Ortel came to the task. Who hired him. Very hard to judge his work without knowing who brought him to the task, and what his instructions were. Was it the League of Women Voters? Was it Common Cause? Was it the Heritage Foundation? Was it the John Birch Society?

My impression so far? Another waste of time. Another lame attempt to smear Hillary. Come back when you've actually got something to look at. I'm perfectly receptive... but I'm not gullible.

It's not settled, it is speculation. Unless the man comes forward and tells us why he did this study, we don't know, neither you nor I.

Bridge in the desert? Wishes granted? Thanks dreamer, I'll pass.

Unsettled? Yup. That's what a said in #12 (quoted above).

And - as I also said - it'd help us evaluate the likely veracity of his work if we knew where the funding came from.

And, hey.... you're passing up a hulluva deal there. Trust me. Really... <G>
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

Unsettled? Yup. That's what a said in #12 (quoted above).

And - as I also said - it'd help us evaluate the likely veracity of his work if we knew where the funding came from.

So, one can determine the veracity of any analysis by knowing who paid for it? Life is much more simple than I ever thought. Thank you! :mrgreen:
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

So, one can determine the veracity of any analysis by knowing who paid for it? Life is much more simple than I ever thought. Thank you! :mrgreen:

So... when I said that knowing who was paying him (if anyone) it'd: '... help us evaluate the likely veracity of his work'

You equated that with: '... determine'

Do you honestly not see the difference between saying something could be A FACTOR... and saying something is THE ONE DETERMINING FACTOR??

Or did you make that false comparison deliberately?

You're right - it's not that simple. I didn't say it was. You have attempted to make it simple so as to make it easier to rebut. There's an actual name for dishonest debating tactics like that.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

You could also call it either slimy or ignorant... depending upon the intent.
 
Re: Financial analyst alleges major holes in Clinton Foundation records

So... when I said that knowing who was paying him (if anyone) it'd: '... help us evaluate the likely veracity of his work'

You equated that with: '... determine'

Do you honestly not see the difference between saying something could be A FACTOR... and saying something is THE ONE DETERMINING FACTOR??

Or did you make that false comparison deliberately?

You're right - it's not that simple. I didn't say it was. You have attempted to make it simple so as to make it easier to rebut. There's an actual name for dishonest debating tactics like that.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

You could also call it either slimy or ignorant... depending upon the intent.

True enough sir, my bad. I misread your previous post, apologies.

To find the truth of the matter with this researcher, one would have to interview him at the very least. Yes it would help to know from where comes his money, but it does not necessarily make his findings inaccurate. It might reveal with whom he associates, but it doesn't change his conclusions and whether they are valid, or not.:peace
 
Back
Top Bottom