• 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!

How Clinton Donor Got on Sensitive Intelligence Board

closing remarks in the video:
"it's not unusual for the chief of staff to play a role"

somebody (cheryl mills) is about to be thrown under the bus

a link between clinton foundation donors and secretary of state largesse cannot be allowed to exist

My thoughts exactly.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_D._Brown

You are silly and uninformed. The administrator of FEMA... had 0 experience in actual disaster relief. The worst that happened? A resignation. I'm sure you'll be screaming for investigation after investigation over this.

I'm asking because I honestly don't know and I'm not seeing anything in a pass over the wiki. Did Michael Brown provide financial incentive in the Bush's non-public service dealings, giving at least the perception of potential quid-pro-quo?

Additionally, based on your wiki, Brown wasn't immediately simply given the administrator position in FEMA with his only background being the IAHA. He was FEMA's General Counsel early in 2001, then acting Deputy Director in September 2001, before becoming the permanent directly in March of 2002, and then the actual Director in January of 2003.

So by the time he was "The administrator" of FEMA, he absolutely DID have experience in actual disaster relief...as the Deputy Director and Acting Deputy Director of the agency for 2 years prior, and tangential experience prior to that as their general counsel.

If there was going to be a position to suggest he had "0 experience" for, it'd have been the Deputy Director position. Which, in reality, would be relatively inaccurate given the nature of how government agencies work, as experience within that government agency IS experience at least somewhat related to the job of running said agency.

None of this means that I think this needs anything more than perhaps this guys resignation, and perhaps not even that. But there seems to be some significant facts different between the two, and from the way you're presenting it.
 
I'm asking because I honestly don't know and I'm not seeing anything in a pass over the wiki. Did Michael Brown provide financial incentive in the Bush's non-public service dealings, giving at least the perception of potential quid-pro-quo?

I addressed this issue from the perspective of this guy having supposedly zero experience. He's hardly the only person (See: Michael D. Brown).

Additionally, based on your wiki, Brown wasn't immediately simply given the administrator position in FEMA with his only background being the IAHA. He was FEMA's General Counsel early in 2001, then acting Deputy Director in September 2001, before becoming the permanent directly in March of 2002, and then the actual Director in January of 2003.

So by the time he was "The administrator" of FEMA, he absolutely DID have experience in actual disaster relief...as the Deputy Director and Acting Deputy Director of the agency for 2 years prior, and tangential experience prior to that as their general counsel.

If there was going to be a position to suggest he had "0 experience" for, it'd have been the Deputy Director position. Which, in reality, would be relatively inaccurate given the nature of how government agencies work, as experience within that government agency IS experience at least somewhat related to the job of running said agency.

None of this means that I think this needs anything more than perhaps this guys resignation, and perhaps not even that. But there seems to be some significant facts different between the two, and from the way you're presenting it.

So in 1 year of "experience" and like 6 months of nomination he managed to gain enough experience to bypass the entire FEMA hierarchy? Come on.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1065950337 said:
Interesting politically correct, partisan response.

Typical template response from people without much evidence.
 
possible, but a poor choice imnho

Not in today's political climate. I would have done the same thing if I thought Republicans would start investigating this for the next 6 years.
 
Not in today's political climate. I would have done the same thing if I thought Republicans would start investigating this for the next 6 years.

why the concern if there is nothing for the investigation to find
 
Why on earth would he have been appointed if it wasn't the huge 6 figure contributions he made to the Clinton slush fund foundation?

Maybe they just got all their biggest donors to put their name in a hat, and Cheryl Mills drew the lucky winner at their annual "Thanks for making us the richest rednecks in America" gala... I mean it was only to sit on a sensitive intelligence board, and who gives a crap about that... right?


As for your other crap, I'm going to respect the topic of this thread and pass, because the last time I checked, it wasn't about Brown, FEMA or Bush.

.

He found the offer in a box of cracker jack, duh.
 
So what HILLARY has a pay to play scheme and once again proves everything is for sale in her eyes including government secrets. At least she didn't pretend to be a butler to hype herself up like TRUMP.


This is the type of judgment Obama praised her for.
 
I don't think that's the case as much on the conservative side.

I can't stand Trump. Rick Perry either. I can name you a lot of Republicans that I have deeply-principled issues with on all fronts. I think the world of Charles Krauthammer, but I'd like to throw Hannity and O'Reilly to the crocs. Don't like Palin as a politician. Absolutely love Condi Rice. Don't like McConnell or Boehner. Etc, etc, etc.

I think I'm pretty typical.

Liberals, however, will turn the blindest of eyes to the most obvious lies and corruption just to "win". Reid, Pelosi, Clinton, Obama, Emanuel, Wasserman....these are some of the most vile and integrity-rotten people walking the earth. Forget issues, these are such awful people, who live lives completely opposite of what they claim to stand for.



I hate to tell you this, but from where I sit, unaffected by the results, I see no difference between Democrats and Republicans...especially on this point. Take a look one day at all the "buddies" Reagan called in.

There is nothing new here, disgusting and immoral, it is the American way.

If you think the Clinton's are going to reward friends and donors, wait till you see who Trump names. Take a look at his campaign.
 
What kind of security clearance is the FEMA director required to have?

Lmao, FEMA is part of the DHS. What kind of security clearance do you think the acting director of it would have? :)
 
Lmao, FEMA is part of the DHS. What kind of security clearance do you think the acting director of it would have? :)

You tell me. How much top secret material does the FEMA director need to see? Do you I now what, "need to know", means?
 
Who wants to go through the trouble? Would you?


absolutely, if i wanted to serve on the board. if i had nothing to hide, why would i not want to proceed
 
absolutely, if i wanted to serve on the board. if i had nothing to hide, why would i not want to proceed

Utter nonsense. It's from the same absurd mentality that brought us 'If you have nothing to fear, why are you opposed to the Patriot Act?' - simplistic thinking at its finest.
 
You tell me. How much top secret material does the FEMA director need to see?

Depends, how much top secret material did his predecessors get to see? Do you know? :)

Do you I now what, "need to know", means?

Apdst, coherent sentences, please.
 
Utter nonsense. It's from the same absurd mentality that brought us 'If you have nothing to fear, why are you opposed to the Patriot Act?' - simplistic thinking at its finest.

why would the prospect of being investigated/vetted be a concern for someone with nothing to hide

it is a common activity for federal nominees/appointees
 
How Clinton Donor Got on Sensitive Intelligence Board - ABC News



Color me shocked that there was pay-to-play going on via the Clinton Foundation while Hillary was head of State.

This is a long standing behavior of the pathological couple, Bill and Hill.
....
Commerce Department's "pay to play" junkets

Seats on Commerce Department international trade missions were sold to corporate figures in return for big contributions to President Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign. Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, who was reported to have opposed the scheme, died when one of the missions crashed in Croatia, leading independent counsel Daniel Pearson to leave his investigation unfinished.

Renting Lincoln Bedroom

More than 800 people stayed overnight in the Lincoln bedroom of the White House during President Bill Clinton's tenure. At least $5.4 million in campaign contributions from many of those guests went into Clinton's re-election effort. Among the paying guests were movie producer Steven Spielberg, Dreamworks SKG head David Geffen and long-time Hollywood powerhouse Lew Wasserman.

A brief guide to Clinton scandals from Travelgate to Emailgate | Washington Examiner

Yup. Corrupt to the core, that's for sure.
 
I understand that, but there has to be a point where even the blindest of Hillary supporters come to the realization that this woman is a walking, talking definition of political corruption. I mean how many more examples do her supporters need?

I think you are giving them too much credit.
 
closing remarks in the video:
"it's not unusual for the chief of staff to play a role"

somebody (cheryl mills) is about to be thrown under the bus

a link between clinton foundation donors and secretary of state largesse cannot be allowed to exist

I think what you are saying her is correct. Corruption such as this as the highest levels of the US government should not be allowed to exist. Further, it should not be voted to the office of POTUS.
 
I don't think that's the case as much on the conservative side.

I can't stand Trump. Rick Perry either. I can name you a lot of Republicans that I have deeply-principled issues with on all fronts. I think the world of Charles Krauthammer, but I'd like to throw Hannity and O'Reilly to the crocs. Don't like Palin as a politician. Absolutely love Condi Rice. Don't like McConnell or Boehner. Etc, etc, etc.

I think I'm pretty typical.

Liberals, however, will turn the blindest of eyes to the most obvious lies and corruption just to "win". Reid, Pelosi, Clinton, Obama, Emanuel, Wasserman....these are some of the most vile and integrity-rotten people walking the earth. Forget issues, these are such awful people, who live lives completely opposite of what they claim to stand for.

Sounds very much like the folks that I have some respect for.
 
why would the prospect of being investigated/vetted be a concern for someone with nothing to hide

it is a common activity for federal nominees/appointees

If you have future job ambitions, the prospect of going through 6-7 investigations that will end up nowhere - see: Benghazi - could be enough to remove yourself from a post immediately. Maximum damage control.
 
If you have future job ambitions, the prospect of going through 6-7 investigations that will end up nowhere - see: Benghazi - could be enough to remove yourself from a post immediately. Maximum damage control.



It was the Benghazi investigation that turned up the fact that HIllary was keeping security sensitive government information on an unsecured server for her convenience.
 
It was the Benghazi investigation that turned up the fact that HIllary was keeping security sensitive government information on an unsecured server for her convenience.

And where has that led? lol.
 
Back
Top Bottom