Clinton Foundation received donations from foreign governments while Hillary was Secretary of State

posted at 10:01 am on February 26, 2015 by Noah Rothman

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton might have had her last pleasant day for quite some time on Tuesday when she received $300,000 to gush insipid platitudes about glass ceilings and everyone coming together for altruism’s sake in Silicon Valley. Meanwhile, the story involving the Clinton Foundation’s scandalous sources of financing have been gaining steam for weeks. Late Wednesday night, it exploded.

On the 19th, the Clinton Foundation revealed that it might shift its policy on accepting foreign donations if Hillary Clinton decides to mount a presidential bid. The foundation did not, however, commit to rejecting foreign donations entirely, a practice from which many Clinton allies have long urged the foundation to abstain. “Democrats in several states that vote early in the presidential nominating process said Thursday they were uneasy with the donations from Saudi Arabia, U.A.E. and other nations,” The Wall Street Journal reported on the 19th. These warnings proved prescient.

Outwardly, the Clinton Foundation insisted that it had ceased to accept funds from foreign sources after 2008 so as to prevent the appearance of a conflict of interest with Hillary serving as America’s chief diplomat. “During Clinton’s four years as secretary of state, the foundation banned all donations from foreign governments due to conflict of interest it would pose for the foundation and the Obama administration,” CNN reported. “Clinton stepped down as America’s top diplomat in early 2013 and the foundation began, once again, to collect donations from foreign governments like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Oman.”

Since its founding in 2001, the Clinton Foundation has amassed $2 billion in contributions, and many of those donations came from sources in foreign governments and businesses. Despite the fact that Clinton has been out of public office for two years, activists still warned that these contributions might soon prove ethically problematic. But the political press seemed initially inclined to frame the Clinton Foundation’s questionable funding sources as a political attack line, and a subject that primarily interested Republicans.

“GOP seeks to make Clinton Foundation a 2016 headache,” a CNN headline read. “If the biggest attack on Hillary’s going to be that she raised too much money for her charity, okay, I’ll take that,” Virginia governor and longtime Clinton Ally Terry McAuliffe told The Washington Post. Like so many allegations of unscrupulous behavior that the Clintons manage to convince the press to forget, this one seemed like it might soon join the myriad of questionable episodes in this family’s past that are nothing more than background radiation ahead of 2016.

Shortly before 9 p.m. on the East Coast on Wednesday, the other shoe in the burgeoning scandal involving the Clinton Foundation’s finances landed with a thud. “The Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration, foundation officials disclosed Wednesday,” The Washington Post revealed.

In The Post’s sprawling dispatch, it was revealed that the Clinton Foundation sought and accepted donations from foreign governments both during and after Hillary Clinton’s tenure as chief diplomat at Foggy Bottom. “In one instance, foundation officials acknowledged they should have sought approval in 2010 from the State Department ethics office, as required by the agreement for new government donors, before accepting a $500,000 donation from the Algerian government,” The Post’s report read.

The donation from Algeria for Haiti earthquake relief, they said, arrived without notice within days of the 2010 quake and was distributed as direct aid to assist in relief. Algeria has not donated to the foundation since, officials said.

The contribution coincided with a spike in the North African country’s lobbying visits to the State Department.

That year, Algeria spent $422,097 lobbying U.S. government officials on human rights issues and U.S.-Algerian relations, according to filings made under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Data tracked by the Sunlight Foundation shows that while the Algerian government’s overall spending on lobbying in the United States remained steady, there was an increase in 2010 in State Department meetings held with lobbyists representing the country — with 12 visits to department officials that year, including some visits with top political appointees. In the years before and after, only a handful of State Department visits were recorded by Algeria lobbyists.

According to the terms of an ethics agreement the Clinton Foundation signed with the Obama administration before Hillary Clinton was tapped to serve as secretary of state, the foundation was not to accept foreign donations but could continue to operate in order to fulfil its philanthropic mission. That agreement was signed by the foundation’s chief executive, Bruce Lindsey, and Senior Advisor to President Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett. The revelation that those terms were violated not only raises questions about Hillary Clinton’s ethics, but also about the White House’s administrational competence.

Sometimes, a good story alone is enough to animate the press corps, and this is a good story. While Republicans are sure to “pounce,” and the media’s focus will almost certainly evolve from “Hillary’s ethical lapses” into “Republicans call Hillary’s ethics into question,” for now the media seems to be more interested in pulling on this thread. And the former secretary of state’s otherwise uncritical coverage in the press has put her at a disadvantage:

The Clinton camp has been under the impression that they would be able to dodge the media and allow reporters to do their rapid responding for them should a scandalous story like this bubble up to the surface. Even some otherwise sympathetic voices in the reporting establishment, however, do not seem inclined to extend to Clinton the benefit of the doubt here:

But who knows how long this will last. CPAC begins today, and the media will have no shortage of GOP officeholders delivering red meat-laden speeches upon which to focus. Surely, one will let loose a sound bite that will compel the nation’s journalistic establishment to devote between two to five days condemning and requesting that other GOP elected officials do the same. For now, however, this revelation is a big problem for Clinton and one which she cannot simply make disappear by sending out her surrogates.

The period in which Clinton could adopt a casual approach to rolling out her 2016 game plan is over. She is on the media’s schedule now.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

How is this not a criminal offense?

I really get tired of asking this question – why do politicians only ever suffer ‘shame’ (ha, as if) or loss of office as their worst punishment for things that the rest of us would go to prison for?

Personally, it’s about time we bring back the guillotine for use in political punishment.

Midas on February 26, 2015 at 10:05 AM

Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration, foundation officials disclosed Wednesday,” The Washington Post revealed.

Well thats no big deal, given that the Obama administration has no ethics beyond winning the current news cycle.

Gatsu on February 26, 2015 at 10:06 AM

‘ethical lapse’ – holy f*ck. /smh

Midas on February 26, 2015 at 10:06 AM

might soon prove ethically problematic.

We are talking a Clinton here so ethics is a foreign concept.

major dad on February 26, 2015 at 10:08 AM

No, really it’s okay, she’s a Democrat. Nothing to see here.

tbrickert on February 26, 2015 at 10:08 AM

So what? Nothing is going to happen. It’s a non-issue.

Walter L. Newton on February 26, 2015 at 10:08 AM

So what about legalizing pot. That should be the issue (channeling WeedisGood)/

Walter L. Newton on February 26, 2015 at 10:09 AM

Money makes the world go around
The world go around
The world go around
Money makes the world go around
It makes the world go ’round.

A mark, a yen, a buck, or a pound
A buck or a pound
A buck or a pound
Is all that makes the world go around,
That clinking clanking sound
Can make the world go ’round.

~~ from Cabaret

RedPepper on February 26, 2015 at 10:10 AM

Gaddafi must not have given enough to the Clinton Foundation shakedown.

Good job, Hillary

Gaddafi was a bad dude, but he was neutralized and no threat to the US. In fact he provided stability to Libya. Removing him only created a power vacuum where ISIS & Al Qaeda were given the red capret to move in. And they did.

AprilApple on February 26, 2015 at 10:10 AM

This should be a HUGE deal, but the state run media treats Scott Walker’s refusal to answer their gotcha questions as a much bigger story.

cat_owner on February 26, 2015 at 10:11 AM

How is this not a criminal offense?

Midas on February 26, 2015 at 10:05 AM

Short answer: because she’s a Democrat. This is rotten to the core. Although she should go to prison for this (presumably Bill as well) there is no way. Best case, and this is actually possible, the whole smelly thing will effectively disqualify her with the voters.

jwolf on February 26, 2015 at 10:11 AM

Net neutrality can’t come soon enough. Her cyber surrogate.

plutorocks on February 26, 2015 at 10:12 AM

Mark Hemingway @Heminator

Hillary was taking foreign donations WHILE SECRETARY OF STATE. Clearly, we need another Dana Milbank column on why Walker is disqualified.

7:24 PM – 25 Feb 2015

Drew McCoy @DrewMTips

It’s interesting that Hillary was on the payroll of foreign nations while SecState but I REALLY need to know who thinks Obama is a Christian

7:38 PM – 25 Feb 2015

Shoshana Weissmann @senatorshoshana

Rule of @HillaryClinton – when you think it can’t get any worse, you’re not even close to knowing how bad it is

6:55 PM – 25 Feb 2015

Peter Baker ✔ @peterbakernyt

While Hillary in office, Clinton Foundation took $500K from Algeria in violation of ethics pact. @PostRoz @thamburger

7:30 PM – 25 Feb 2015

Joshua Culling @joshuaculling

Was Hillary Clinton our first pay-to-play Secretary of State?

7:24 PM – 25 Feb 2015

Cuffé @CuffyMeh

You know what is literally un-American? Taking bribes from foreign governments.

7:52 PM – 25 Feb 2015

Josh Jordan @NumbersMuncher

And here I thought Hillary’s speeches paid well, but they’ve got nothing on a $500K donation from Algeria to get an in with the State Dept.

7:49 PM – 25 Feb 2015

Scott Lincicome @scottlincicome

@Heminator Dems hate foreign trade, unless it’s cash for influence

7:32 PM – 25 Feb 2015

Mark Hemingway @Heminator

Can’t wait for Hillary to explain how the Washington Post is at the heart of the vast right-wing conspiracy.

7:47 PM – 25 Feb 2015

Mark Hemingway @Heminator

Imagine discovering Haliburton was still paying Cheney when he was VP. That’s about the same as Hillary taking foreign $ while Sec. of State

7:31 PM – 25 Feb 2015

Tom Hamburger @thamburger

One donation from Algeria violated an ethics agreement with Obama administration, the group says.

Washington Post @washingtonpost

Will Antonin @Will_Antonin

Every politician has dirty laundry. Only the Clintons have laundry so dirty you better get tested after handling it.

8:04 PM – 25 Feb 2015

Anthony Bialy @AnthonyBialy

Foundation taking foreign funds while @HillaryClinton made the world scarier. Perfect combination of shadiness and incompetence, always.

Mark Hemingway @Heminator

Look, the important thing is that Hillary didn’t take any money from the Koch Brothers. Then she’d be in a world of hurt.

7:34 PM – 25 Feb 2015

Resist We Much on February 26, 2015 at 10:13 AM

How is this not a criminal offense?

Perhaps she’s figured out the fines are worth paying to compile the money? :

In a “Conciliation Agreement” with the FEC, New York 2000 and its treasurer Andrew Grossman agreed to pay a civil fine of $35,000 and amend false reports to reflect failure to report a $721,000 donation by Los Angeles millionaire lawyer and businessman Peter Franklin Paul.

Pass the “Conciliation Agreement”, and hold the mayo…………….

Rovin on February 26, 2015 at 10:13 AM

I am a WOMAN.-She SCREAMED

artist on February 26, 2015 at 10:14 AM

Our Foreign policy up for bid by the Clintons.

It’s got the smell of protection money. It stinks.

WisRich on February 26, 2015 at 10:14 AM

Hillary approves of the FCC’s Net Neutrality rules. I can’t imagine why…

Net Neutrality Is Anything But Neutral

Resist We Much on February 26, 2015 at 10:15 AM

What difference, at this point, does it make? – HRC

The Clinton’s have been selling influence and access since the days in Little Rock, Arkansas. This is their standard operating procedure.

The MSM isn’t really interested in the continuing malfeasance and corruption of HRC and her husband. It wasn’t interested when they resided in the WH, and was even less interested during their ‘dead broke’ years when HRC was the carpetbagger Senator in NY.

The only real motive the MSM has to weaken HRC is to create a case for Elizabeth Warren to change her mind and jump in the race to bring forth a 3rd Obama populist-fascist term. Until the MSM starts doing their investigative job regarding Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein, the majority of MSM reporting on this will be pieces largely defending the Clinton’s.

Athos on February 26, 2015 at 10:17 AM

Just an imperceptible bump in the road to the Whitehouse.

vnvet on February 26, 2015 at 10:18 AM

I don’t think she loves her country.

hip shot on February 26, 2015 at 10:19 AM

Our Foreign policy up for bid by the Clintons.

It’s got the smell of protection money. It stinks.

WisRich on February 26, 2015 at 10:14 AM

Yeppers. The Dollars-for-the-Lincoln-Bedroom 2.0 will be a doozy.

Resist We Much on February 26, 2015 at 10:19 AM

Haiti? really. and honest press would be reporting how all that money was stolen. Little when to the victims.

Big Money means Big Theft

r keller on February 26, 2015 at 10:19 AM

it was revealed that the Clinton Foundation sought and accepted donations from foreign governments both during and after Hillary Clinton’s tenure as chief diplomat at Foggy Bottom.

I am fairly certain that this violates disclosures and ethics rules in documents that she signed and agreed to when she was sworn in as SOS.

It will come up in the General Election if she gets the Dem nomination and also explains why she has been hiding lately. She doesn’t want any questions about it until her and Bill work out the definition of the word “is”.

Johnnyreb on February 26, 2015 at 10:19 AM

American Elite Media: Let’s move on….

d1carter on February 26, 2015 at 10:20 AM

Why do I have the sense this is the Warren camp or some other anti-Clinton faction trying to undermine the “inevitability” of nominating Killary?

Happy Nomad on February 26, 2015 at 10:21 AM

How is this not a criminal offense?

The Clintons are Democrats and support abortion on-demand.

If feminists can overlook Bubba’s sexual ‘escapades’ (harassment, rape, exploitation, Orgy Island & Air Fvck One), Democrats will happily overlook Hillary’s sleaze…because First Vajayjay!

Resist We Much on February 26, 2015 at 10:22 AM

A lot of people, movements, and governments forked over a hell of a lot of quid.

And the pro quo???

They sure as hell didn’t send the Clinton’s money to feed the children.

The Oxford Dictionary of the English Language has this entry for “Grifter.”

Grifter grift•er (ˈgrɪf tər) n. Slang.

1. a person who operates a sideshow at a circus, fair, etc., esp. a gambling attraction.

2. a swindler, dishonest gambler, or the like.

3. See Bill and Hillary Clinton.
/

coldwarrior on February 26, 2015 at 10:22 AM

A dint of hard work can bring in a lot of wealth. But not as much as acceptings bribes or embezzling $6billion from the State department.

Flange on February 26, 2015 at 10:22 AM

Anybody asked Hillary if she knew about Bill’s trip to Pedophile Island…?

d1carter on February 26, 2015 at 10:22 AM

This all happened after her fall….she was unconscious.

d1carter on February 26, 2015 at 10:25 AM

According to the terms of an ethics agreement the Clinton Foundation signed with the Obama administration

An ethics agreement between Clinton and Obama. Thanks for the laugh of the day. Maybe year.

rbj on February 26, 2015 at 10:28 AM

Some people, very few indeed, enter government to serve the people. Others, see: Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, etc…enter government to engorge themselves at the public trough and grossly enrich their families.

Franklin100 on February 26, 2015 at 10:29 AM

If we has an honest press, the Clinton’s would be toxic and disqualified. Maybe even indicted. Certainly audited.

Instead, the DEMOCRAT MEDIA Industrial Complex picks at any microscopic GOP thread and desperately turns a non-story into a dig and a quest for destruction.

AprilApple on February 26, 2015 at 10:31 AM

Unsurprising.

Remember the Chinese money that found its way to the Clintoon coffers back in Billy Jeff’s hayday?

Remember who gave the Chinese access to our supercomputer technology, breaking with longstanding practice?

She no doubt felt right at home in this lawless administration.

hillbillyjim on February 26, 2015 at 10:32 AM

The revelation that those terms were violated not only raises questions about Hillary Clinton’s ethics, but also about the White House’s administrational competence.

Ethics violations?
Rule-breaking?
Lawlessness?
By a Democrat?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Pelosi Schmelosi on February 26, 2015 at 10:36 AM

We are in serious trouble when this cow can skate (at least up until now) through this process and the President can openly violate the Constitution and follow that up with an “orders-to-ignore-enforcing-immigration-law” chaser…

dpduq on February 26, 2015 at 10:37 AM

If the Clinton charity were giving food to homeless Americans, and worked on the model of Catholic Charities…bleedin heart help to make things better…things would be getting 2 billion dollars better for poor people around the world…

Instead this so called Charity looks like a slush fund for democrats so they don’t have to have real jobs and have three or more square meals with Grey Goose, like Air Pelosi, and a hotel to stay in, and private jet transportation. This is what it looks like. 10% to charity is a failed charity.

Fleuries on February 26, 2015 at 10:37 AM

After careful thought and consideration, I’ve come to the conclusion that we are all just a bunch of rubes, and fail to see the nuance of the deft skills of the Clinton’s.

They are our betters.

They deserve to rule.

Just because.

coldwarrior on February 26, 2015 at 10:38 AM

They’re sorry and they promise never to do it again. So now can she be president? Do we have to have one of those messy elections, can’t the press just give it to her?

Cindy Munford on February 26, 2015 at 10:40 AM

“If the biggest attack on Hillary’s going to be that she raised too much money for her charity, okay, I’ll take that,” Virginia governor and longtime Clinton Ally Terry McAuliffe told The Washington Post.

.
Yep, just who the Clintoons want to defend them, the sleezeball Gubnah of Virginia who is little more than a used car or computer salesman (no offense to salesmen, I am one). If Terry McAwful pops up with this kind of limp, disingenuous defense of HiLarry he must not have gotten his payoff this month. When he begins the full-throated throw-down to get HiLarry off the hook, you’ll know he’s been paid off and it’ll be time to look into his Senatorial Campaign Finances, their timing and from whom.
.
Terry McAwful, lyin, cheatin’ failed business operator… we’re gonna find out what you been hidin’, Terry, and soon.

ExpressoBold on February 26, 2015 at 10:46 AM

can’t the press just give it to her?

Cindy Munford on February 26, 2015 at 10:40 AM

They will try to, that’s for sure.

VegasRick on February 26, 2015 at 10:47 AM

The media won’t cover it, so it doesn’t matter.

Any Republican who brings it up will be portrayed as a nut job and a mindless hater.

DRayRaven on February 26, 2015 at 10:52 AM

“If the biggest attack on Hillary’s going to be that she raised too much money for her charity, okay, I’ll take that,” Virginia governor and longtime Clinton Ally Terry McAuliffe told The Washington Post.

Except, as the NYT demonstrated, that ‘charity’ often goes to projects named Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea.

Resist We Much on February 26, 2015 at 10:56 AM

Surprised Obama has not issued an executive order declaring Hillary the next President.

albill on February 26, 2015 at 11:01 AM

Hope and Change 2.0, now with more Hope.

Bishop on February 26, 2015 at 11:14 AM

The illiberals who hated on her in 2008, now support this stinky beached decaying sperm whale.

Schadenfreude on February 26, 2015 at 11:17 AM

Where are the trolls, er, clowns?

Schadenfreude on February 26, 2015 at 11:19 AM

How on earth can someone violate the ethics of the Obama Administration?

newpine on February 26, 2015 at 11:30 AM

Surprised Obama has not issued an executive order declaring Hillary the next President.

albill on February 26, 2015 at 11:01 AM

You must be kidding.

The obamas hate the Clintons with a fervor impossible to express.

If Jeb/Hillary are the ones, obama will support Jeb.

Bill and Barack don’t want Hillary to win and will undermine her all the way, not in front of cameras, of course.

Schadenfreude on February 26, 2015 at 11:50 AM

Remember the bribe money that Marc Rich used to buy a pardon from the Clinton’s ? His ex-wife “donated” $450,000 dollars into the Clinton museum. She also “donated” $100,000 dollars into Hillary’s Senate campaign,..and this is just the money that was discovered by the local-press. Heaven knows how many other large deposits of cash were funneled into the multiple-accounts owned by the Clinton’s ? I guarantee you one thing. If the Clinton’s get back into the White House there will be another James Riady, and another Marc Rich. The Clinton’s have been running this influence-peddling scam ever since they first got into politic’s. There are many foreign-governments who would love to get access to inside the White House,..and the Clinton’s,..(just like they did before,) will happily sell the “proper-connection’s” to government-contracts for the right price !

Bugdust172 on February 26, 2015 at 12:11 PM

Hey Hilbag, we haven’t forgotten what you didn’t do in Benghazi.
You and Billy Boy should have the fleas from a thousand camels fly on you.

woodhull on February 26, 2015 at 12:36 PM

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-foundations-corporate-donors-spent-350m-lobbying-federal-government/article/2560709

Palantir Technologies, which sells high-priced software to national defense agencies, gave in the six figures to the Clinton Foundation and spent more than $500,000 dollars on lobbyists in 2014.
H&R Block, whose business depends on tax law, gave at least $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation and spent $1.5 million on lobbying.
Monsanto Company, accused by the Left of being an agribusiness giant that crushes small farmers with genetically modified crops, spent more than $3 million on lobbyists and gave more than half a million to the Clintons.
Also on both lists are defense contractors like United Technologies Corporation, Honeywell International, Lockheed Martin and Boeing.
While some companies lobby to fend off regulation that could eat into their profits, others make money off of federal contracts. Still others, including several multimillion dollar donors to the Clintons, used K Street lobbyists to successfully create or expand government programs that line their pockets, such as TracFone and the Obamaphone program and the US Green Building Council, whose lobbyists got a carve-out written into law that required the organization to get paid every time the government constructed a building.
Energy companies whose earnings can be shaped by regulation are included, such as Chevron, ExxonMobil, Duke Energy and even smaller companies like the Anadarko Petroleum Corporation and the Newmont Mining Corporation.
Healthcare companies like Merck & Co., Medtronic, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, and Procter & Gamble gave to the Clintons while simultaneously seeking to impact federal policy.
As did unions, including the Communications Workers of America, the AFL-CIO and the American Federation of Teachers.
“The nonprofits the Clintons maintain are magnets for special interest cash and give U.S. companies and foreign governments access to an influential former president and all but declared candidate for the White House,” said Bill Allison, an expert in lobbying at the Sunlight Foundation

bandutski on February 26, 2015 at 12:40 PM

Except, as the NYT demonstrated, that ‘charity’ often goes to projects named Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea.

Resist We Much on February 26, 2015 at 10:56 AM

Get off your high horse you sexist!

Teach me how to Bucky on February 26, 2015 at 1:06 PM

Sleaze, international shakedown, Jessie Jackson is jealous.

jake49 on February 26, 2015 at 1:07 PM

Ethics violations
Rule-breaking
Lawlessness
Democrat

Pelosi Schmelosi on February 26, 2015 at 10:36 AM

Remove the question marks. It reads better as a list of qualifications for Democrat pols and their Dimocrat slaves.

Closet Optimist on February 26, 2015 at 1:12 PM

Monica Lewinsky’s ex-boyfriend’s wife asks:

What difference, at this point, does it make?

Galtian on February 26, 2015 at 1:22 PM

“At this point, what differ”…oh he11, you get my point!!?….

elvis lives on February 26, 2015 at 2:15 PM

I think there should be an official government review, assign someone from the AG office to investigate who leaked this information, and why is it being reported.

Don’t they know this could hurt Clinton? Any reporter, reporting this, should be summoned, reprimanded, and fired on the spot…we cannot have dissension in the media ranks.

Hillary is going to be elected, and some “do-gooder” reporter, reporting on facts about illicit funding will be dealt with.

The Washington Post should be ashamed of itself…

right2bright on February 26, 2015 at 2:18 PM

Her best approach is still to wait it out. Surely, some Republican will answer a question on Eric Holder’s inner most thoughts with the answer “I don’t know” and we’ll be off once again on a 5 day counter-offensive regarding Republican dog whistles and their true meaning.

Fred 2 on February 26, 2015 at 3:51 PM

Whoever is calling these type of foundations charities is being very charitable. They are clearly slush funds that only the politically connected can run without IRS scrutiny. A commoner would be thrown in jail for this type of activity.

Eddie Baby on February 26, 2015 at 4:25 PM

Definition if whore. Selling one’s body or soul to highest bidder without regard.

jaywemm on February 26, 2015 at 7:11 PM

Be careful of the trap. Bringing it out now will make it no news in nov. 16 news.

BruceB on February 27, 2015 at 9:49 AM

Gaddafi must not have given enough to the Clinton Foundation shakedown.

Good job, Hillary

Gaddafi was a bad dude, but he was neutralized and no threat to the US. In fact he provided stability to Libya. Removing him only created a power vacuum where ISIS & Al Qaeda were given the red capret to move in. And they did.

AprilApple on February 26, 2015 at 10:10 AM

Now, all we need is to connect the last two or three dots.

Did a Clinton donor country, also support the “Libyan Rebels” who invaded our Libyan facility in Benghazi and killed our Ambassador?

And did Hillary’s relationship with those rebels (and their supporters) induce her to cover up for them, by blaming an “anti-Islamic video?

ReggieA on February 27, 2015 at 3:37 PM