Politics
Out of context: Reply #19381
- Started
- Last post
- 33,773 Responses
- ********2
Interesting read.
http://www.politico.com/story/20…
Quick excerpts:
"U.S. ethics laws weren’t written to account for a commander in chief with such far-reaching interests. Unlike most other federal officials, presidents and vice presidents aren’t subject to conflict-of-interest prohibitions. Americans will have to trust Trump or Clinton to do the right thing, since neither would be bound by law."
"There are many potential minefields for each candidate: Trump has made real estate deals in the Middle East, for instance, and his businesses have taken out hundreds of millions of dollars in loans from Deutsche Bank, a German institution linked to several investigations in the United States. The Clinton Foundation, meanwhile, has accepted money from a string of governments whose interests don’t always align with those of the United States, including Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar."
Much more in the article!
- Great article.IRNlun6
- Although I'd say the conflict is greater with Clinton because the wealth was accumulated as a direct result of her and her husbands political careers.IRNlun6
- Well, the real question is, "which candidate is most likely to abuse their role as president for personal gain?"********
- Moreover, I would argue that the Clinton Foundation's "wealth" does not belong to the Clintons. It's a non-profit. The money flows to development projects.********
- Whereas Donald's company is a for-profit private firm that will certainly benefit him and his family during and after his potential presidency.********
- Also, the Clintons have addressed this conflict to some degree (although not in enough detail to satisfy me). It's widely speculated that the Foundation will********
- ...essentially cease to exist if Hillary is elected, in order to avoid conflicts. It's unfair that no one would ask Trump to shut down his company if elected.********
- (When I say "unfair" what I mean is that it's a bit unfair to compare a personal private company to a non-profit when discussing conflict potential.)********
- is that really a question anyone cant answer in like 10 seconds?yurimon
- i'm taking my upvote away.yurimon
- Sigh. Yurimon the simpleton, in with his two cents.********
- article post was cool, but that answer to the question, i think you know deep inside nb..yurimon
- Fair points nb. Non-profit is a bit of misnomer though because most keep an extraordinary amount for expenses vs actual donations.IRNlun6
- Clinton foundation is no exception but technically it should be a simpler task for them to break ties vs Trumps many business endeavors.IRNlun6
- CharityWatch:
https://www.charityw…******** - The Clinton Foundation is probably one of the best organizations. As an operating foundation, they do a lot of the ground work themselves.********
- So it's very easy for pundits to accuse them of only gaving 15% of revenue to grants. But that's ignoring entirely how the Clinton Foundation works.********
- *giving********
- Also +1 to IRNIun6 for the pleasant debate! I respect your point of view!********
- Clinton being a former lawyer and a politician at the highest level, I'd be more surprised if audits showed fraud or misappropriation.IRNlun6
- I don't doubt their charity does some good. The biggest questions seem to be why/where donations come from(ie. Arab Monarchies)IRNlun6
- I appreciate debating with you as well nb.IRNlun6
- big ups to nb for the quality post********