http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11657573/
So who is advising hillary these days? she lambastes the Bush administration 9for allowing the UAE-based firm) to run US ports…but forgets that husband bill was a paid advisor to the UAE? There seems to be a disconnect…so it is OK for an ex-president to accept bribes from a foreign government, but not OK for the US government to allow a foreing firm to run a US port? WHAT is this woman smoking?
I don’t know. Panama Red?
In what way was Bill Clinton “bribed,” by the way? I’m completely confused by your use of the word.
I’d guess she’s lying, but on the other hand I never suspected the two of having an exceptionally close marriage…
I disagree with HRC about the ports but I couldn’t give a shit less about the rest of this. Is this the big topic on Limbaugh today or something?
Sorry, i should have said “honorarium”…that’s a much nicer way of putting it!
What are you suggesting is improper about it?
I guess you’ve missed the point. He was paid as a consultant and didn’t do anything wrong as far as I know. All he did was advise them on how to present the deal to the public. Do you know something I don’t?
And I should probably be beaten for this, but perhaps Hillary was smoking… a Dubai?
I’m not following the logic. Why can’t your husband be an advisor to the UAE, but you believe that American port security should be entirely domestic?
While it looks like the only substantive debate concerning the OP is why 'bribe" was used incorrectly, this really is more of a GD topic. I’ll move it there for you.
From the link in the OP:
No improper behavior on Bill’s part. As for Hillary – why is she obliged to agree with her husband on every point?
I can’t understand how the money he’s made from the UAE government plays into this issue at all. He probably has a lot of speaking engagements and I don’t know if she does her own taxes. None of this qualifies as a bribe.
Now, if the question is “How did she not know he’d advised the government of the UAE on how to deal with this issue,” I don’t know. That news is not quite as recent, however, and since I couldn’t get the MSN page to load the first time I tried, I was left with the impression that it had come out that the UAE paid Bill $450,000 grand for his consultation. That would be an even harder question for her to answer, but I see that that’s not the case. The fact that he earned that money from them 4 years ago doesn’t place either of them in any kind of conflict.
Am I the only one who doesn’t see a debate here? Seems more like the Pointless Talking Point du jour™ from GOP Central Command…
Because that’s what a good wife would do.
So…let me get this straight. Bill takes a “bribe” from the UAE. Hillary Clinton than acts in a way that works completely against the interests of those who “bribed” Bill.
Is that correct?
His this a Double-Secret Reverse Bribe?
-Joe
Actually, the OP is in error. There is nothing in the story linked that says Senator Clinton was unaware of money earned in the last couple of years. The sole point on which her office expressed her ignorance was the specific action of the UAE in approaching Mr. Clinton two weeks ago.
Since I do not know whether Mr. and Mrs. Clinton have (between Congressional activities, speaking tours, and visits to various medical facilities) actually spent any time together in the last two weeks, it seems that we are looking at a lot of blather based on an error.
When come back, bring discussion.
This one is closed.
[ /Moderating ]