- Joined
- Oct 21, 2015
- Messages
- 53,813
- Reaction score
- 10,864
- Location
- Kentucky
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
House Democrats mistakenly release transcript confirming big payout to Clinton friend Sidney Blumenthal - LA Times
"But the report, which the Democrats published as a preemptive strike before the Republican majority releases findings likely to charge ineptitude and deception by the former secretary of State, also revealed, apparently unintentionally, details about the eye-popping amount of money a close Clinton friend and advisor made in a contract with a pro-Clinton nonprofit."
It certainly pays to be a friend of the Clintons.
Ummm, did you read the whole article or just the headline?
Because the article says nothing about Blumenthal receiving any money from Clinton
Did YOU read the post, headline, or article?
I don't think anyone claimed he got money directly from Clinton.
Did YOU read the post, headline, or article?
I don't think anyone claimed he got money directly from Clinton.
Yes, the OP claims Blumenthal was paid to be a friend of Clinton and provides no evidence of it. All I see is evidence that the free market considers Blumenthal's advice to be valuable
No, the LA Times made that claim. The OP merely restated the Times' claim.
Well of course he's received tons of money directly from the Clinton Foundation, but that is old news.Ummm, did you read the whole article or just the headline?
Because the article says nothing about Blumenthal receiving any money from Clinton
The OP merely restated the Times' claim.
It certainly pays to be a friend of the Clintons.
Well of course he's received tons of money directly from the Clinton Foundation, but that is old news.
Like I said, old news.The article says nothing about the Clinton Foundation
Wrong. The OP said
House Democrats mistakenly release transcript confirming big payout to Clinton friend Sidney Blumenthal
The article says nothing about the Clinton Foundation
And the article he linked had the title:
Like I said, the OP restated the comments made by the LA Times.
It certainly pays to be a friend of the Clintons.
The LAT article did not say
That was the OP but it's pretty revealing that the OP won't own up to his own words
OK, I'll be sure and be on the lookout if you don't quote exactly word for word what the article linked to says. I'm sure you've never added an opinion to any links you've posted.
The OP merely restated the Times' claim.
Thank you for finally admitting that your claim
was wrong and that the OP also stated his own opinion (which is not supported by the article)
I accept your surrender
The Clintons have scratched many backs as long as people scratched theirs.
I'll be on the lookout for your pristine comments with zero deviation from a link.
Then we'll see who surrenders.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?