Gloating like the cat that swallowed the canary, MITT ROMNEY of the 2012 tax return flap strongly says HILLARY HAS TO PRODUCE HER TAX RETURNS, along with Bill's and the Clinton Foundation's
The GOP's most recent nominee for president, and what some call the titular head of the Republican Party, says that what Hillary Clinton has done sure "... looks like bribery..." --- then two or three more times he referred to "Hillary Clinton" and associated her with the term and concept of "bribery"
According to yesterday's Politico, fromer GOP Presidential Nominee Mitt Romney was pulling no punches. Here's how Politico's Nick Gass told it: "Mitt Romney reacted to the latest news about cash flowing to Hillary Clinton’s family foundation from the Russians who purchased a uranium production company, saying that 'it looks like bribery.' *** 'I mean, there is every appearance that Hillary Clinton was bribed to grease the sale of, what, 20 percent of America’s uranium production to Russia, and then it was covered up by lying about a meeting at her home with the principals, and by erasing emails,' the former Republican nominee and governor of Massachusetts told radio show host Hugh Hewitt on Thursday. 'And you know, I presume we might know for sure whether there was or was not bribery if she hadn’t wiped out thousands of emails. But this is a very, very serious series of facts, and it looks like bribery.'..." (See "Mitt Romney on Clinton Foundation donations: 'It looks like bribery' ' by Nick Gass, 4/24/15, Politico [http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/mitt-romney-clinton-foundation-donations-bribery-117311.html]).
There was similar coverage of Mitt Romney's interview by Hugh Hewitt in "The Hill" ( See "Romney: Donation to Clinton Foundation 'looks like bribery' " by David McCabe, 4/24/15, The Hill [http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/239946-romney-clinton-donations-looks-like-bribery]). And this is how "The Hill" opened its account: "Former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney said Thursday evening that foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation make it appear as though Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton "was bribed" while Secretary of State."
On Thursday's Hugh Hewitt Show, Romney said that, the Clinton family foundation scandal is "At best... an ethical morass” for [Hillary] Clinton’s campaign...." “That’s at best,” Romney repeated. When he was asked whether he thought Hillary would withdraw from the presidential race; Romney responded, with this: “We’re going to see what the facts say” and that Democrats are going to want someone who Americans can trust, “and someone who is not embroiled in what appears to be a form of bribery.... I think people are going to rethink this race on the Democratic side," then Romney added "... And as for Elizabeth Warren, boy, I sure hope it’s not her.... [l]et me tell you, but there may be some others who are more palatable.”
According to the report of Romney's statements in "The Hill" --- Romney dismissed the Clinton campaign's response as just so much “blah, blah, blah....” Then Romney also blasted Hillary Clinton's Campaign Spokesman Brian Fallon, who had responded to a New York Times story published Thursday. Fallon had said that suggesting Clinton’s State Department had "exerted undue influence” on the sale of Uranium One “is utterly baseless...” [Now that sure sounds like pure “blah, blah, blah....” to me].
ROMNEY SAYS THAT IF HILLARY CLINTON CONTINUES TO RUN, SHE AND BILL CLINTON WILL HAVE TO RELEASE THEIR TAX RETURNS JOINTLY, ALONG WITH ALL OF THE FOUNDATION TAXES
Then the article went on, "Romney said it was not clear yet what effect the questions could have on her campaign. But he said that it is likely she would have to do something he doubted she would be inclined to do now --- release her tax returns. “Well, no question if she runs for president, Bill and Hillary Clinton will have to release their joint returns, not just her return, but their joint returns, because assets are commingled,” he said. *** “And No. 2, yes, the foundation would have to release its returns as well. I’m not asking for 10 years, but I’m saying they ought to give at least three years of returns so we can see where the money’s been coming from.”
6 comments:
The inside deals the Clintons had is the biggest money scandal in political history.
UPDATE: THE "MAKING A JOKE OUT OF HILLARY" Edition
THE CLINTON FOUNDATION SCANDAL HAS BECOME PART OF HILLARY'CLINTON'S BACKGROUND STORY AND IT'S MADE IT INTO THE NATIONAL CONSCIOUSNESS
When a Hillary supporter like Saturday Night Live's Cecily Strong is making jokes like this at the White House Correspondents Assn. dinner, then Hillary has a problem. Variety says that Strong made light of her preference for Hillary Clinton in 2016 [Strong actually did so repeatedly], but she also took a jab at Clinton’s early campaign scandal with this:
"Our relationship with Israel will be great in the next administration. Just as soon as Israel makes a generous donation to the Clinton Foundation.”
The joke implies a pay to play Hillary Clinton presidency, with foreign policy decisions being made based on what's been given to the Clintons' family foundation. Unfortunately, only the print media seemed to be in on the joke; except for Fox, the TV folks thought it was way out of line. When those folks booed, Strong asked if they were shouting, "Troooh, Troooh...."
UPDATE: THE "HILLARY CLINTON CAMPAIGN E-MAIL FOR EVERYBODY TO JOIN IN THE FIGHT AGAINST THE 'CLINTON CASH...' BOOK" EDITION
THE HILLARY CLINTON CAMPAIGN IS FEELING THE PRESURE AND IS RESORTING TO AN ELECTRONIC VERSION OF THE HISTORIC "LEVEE EN MASSE"
FIRST E-MAIL TO CLINTON "LIST" TO REFER TO THE BOOK "CLINTON CASH" BY NAME -- INCLUDED TWO OF THE SAME TALKING POINTS SENT TO CERTAIN
CLINTON "ALLIES" IN FAILED ATTEMPT TO STIFLE PRESS COVERAGE OF THE SAME BOOK
CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN JOHN PODESTA SHOWED THE EARLY TENSION CAUSED BY THE ADVENT OF PETER SCHWEIZER'S BOOK --- PODESTA ACKNOWLEDGES THAT "THIS IS AN IMPORTANT MOMENT IN THIS CAMPAIGN"
Bloomberg News is reporting that "Hillary Clinton’s campaign has begun rallying supporters off the scrutiny of her financial ties, urging them in a Friday e-mail to 'show you’ve got Hillary’s back' in the face of “baseless attacks.' *** In the message, campaign Chairman John Podesta asks Clinton backers to support their candidate as 'a former Republican operative with ties to a Koch-funded organization … uses allegations and conspiracy theories to stitch together a false narrative about Hillary without producing a single shred of evidence.' ...” ( See "An e-mail says the Democratic candidate needs help to counter 'baseless attacks” by Jennifer Epstein, 4/24/15, Bloomberg News [http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-04-24/hillary-clinton-campaign-seeks-to-raise-cash-off-clinton-cash]).
Podesta is reported to have made this pitch: “If we don't fight back now, we send a signal to our opponents that we'll shrivel in the face of whatever will follow.” He adds: “This is an important moment in this campaign.”
Hillary's problem isn't some guys book- Republican or not
UPDATE: THE "HILLARY CAMPAIGN TRIES TO MAKE LEMONADE OUT OF LEMONS ON SUNDAY SHOWS" EDITION
THE [H>] CLINTON CAMPAIGN TRYING TO STEM THE TIDE WITH A "DIRECT EVIDENCE" PLOY TO STOP PETER SCHEIZER'S MOMENTUM
Brooklyn's own Colin Campbell [by way of California, I think] is still very much in the middle of the brew involving the brouhaha over Peter Schweizer's book.
According to Mr. Campbell's piece for the Business Insider today, "Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign is highlighting a new interview with 'Clinton Cash' author Peter Schweizer as proof that his upcoming book is nothing more than a partisan smear. *** 'By finally admitting that he omitted key details and has no direct evidence, the author of "Clinton Cash" just confirmed what many media reports had already made clear." Clinton campaign spokesman Josh Schwerin told Business Insider on Sunday, "'Clinton Cash' is nothing more than a tangled web of conspiracy theories backed by no actual evidence.'... The article goes on to discuss how "... Schweizer was on the defensive on Sunday... when ABC News host George Stephanopoulos grilled him on the book's ability to deliver hard evidence that Clinton broke the law. Stephanopoulos, who served in the Clinton administration, also called Schweizer out for not including a fact in his book that might have made the Clintons seem less nefarious...." ( See "Hillary Clinton's campaign says this new interview proves 'Clinton Cash' is bunk" by Colin Campbell, 4/26/25, Business Insider [http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clintons-campaign-this-interview-proves-clinton-cash-is-bunk-2015-4]).
Of course the Clinton spokesperson completely ignored that Peter Scheizer immediately pushed back on Stephanopoulos; and the author of "Clinton Cash..." asserted that "... his more circumstantial evidence, taken together, does ultimately provide a 'smoking gun' that should be investigated as a potential crime. He compared his evidence to what often leads law enforcement authorities to investigate other crimes like insider trading.... 'The smoking gun is in the pattern of behavior,' he said. 'here's the analogy I would give you. It's a little bit like insider trading. ... They look at a pattern of stock trades. If the person has access to that information and then they do a series of well-timed trades. That warrants investigation. I think the same thing applies here.'... "
In addition, the panel discussion went very badly for the Hillary Clinton folks, with Donna Brazile's, and Stephanopoulos' attempts to minimize Hillary's Clinton Foundation problems being over whelmed by the panelists Mark Halperin, John Heilemann and Newt Gingrich, who clearly demonstrated the breadth and depth of issues confronting the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Campaign, going forward.
Needless to say, Gingrich was the toughest panelest, going so far as to assert there already evidence of criminal violations of federal law for an investigation leading to indictemnts -- according to Gingrich no person or entity can take donations from foreign governments with out specific U.S. governmental authorization; and there is no indication that ever was done by Bill. Hillary or Chelsea Clinton.
BACKFILL : THE "SOME MORE OF THE SAME --- BECAUSE IT NEEDS TO BE SAID --- OVER & OVER" EDITION
NEWSMAX FEATURES WHAT FORMER U.S. HOUSE SPEAKER NEWT GINGRICH SAID TO STEPHANOPOULOS AND BRAZILE AND THE OTHERS ON ABC'S "THIS WEEK" PROGRAM
According to Newsmax, "If Hillary Clinton were any other public figure, she'd face indictment for her role in a foundation that was accepting multimillion dollar contributions from foreign governments, a fired-up former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Sunday... during a panel discussion on ABC's "This Week" program. 'This isn't a political problem; this is a historic problem. The Constitution of the United States says you cannot take money from foreign governments without explicit permission of the Congress.'..." (See "Newt Gingrich: Hillary Would Be Indicted if She Was Anybody Else" by
Sandy Fitzgerald, 4/26/15, Newsmax [http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Newt-Gingrich-Hillary-Clinton-foundation-donation/2015/04/26/id/640829/]).
The Newsmax article by Sandy Fitzgerald concluded with this: "He believes a jury would look at the entire case and respond that 'it's clearly against the Constitution and U.S. law,' to take foreign donations. *** Further, Gingrich pointed out, Clinton was 'on the Watergate committee' and 'she knew exactly what to do and eliminated 33,000 emails,' referring to the former secretary of state's decision in March to turn over 30,490 emails from the private account she'd used while serving as secretary of state while deleting more than half the emails she either wrote or received from 2009 through 2013 after designating them as being personal. *** '[Former President] Richard Nixon only erased 18 minutes,' said Gingrich."
Meanwhile another member of ABC's "This Week" panel, Donna Brazile, was sputtering something about "... it's an international foundation doing charitable work..." trying to speak over some of what Gingrich was saying.
Post a Comment