Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes, it seems so.

    Controversies surrounding the Clinton Foundation also didn’t do her any favors. The fact that the organization took contributions from foreign governments while Clinton was secretary of State—violating its own commitment, as well as State Department protocol—fueled the perception that big corporations could influence Clinton’s decisions at State by giving to the group. And though evidence of direct quid pro quos never emerged, there were plenty of examples of corporations finding favor with the State Department after giving to the foundation.

  • The Clinton Foundation is a Red Herring

    It's easy to point fingers at the Clinton Foundation, the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton's email servers, or the conduct of the DNC. But it wouldn't have mattered if the Foundation had a flawless record, just as it didn't matter that the FBI found no wrong-doing with the emails. The people who were against the Clinton campaign weren't going to listen to facts. They had made up their minds to believe the cliches and the easy soundbites, and no evidence about anything else ever mattered to them.

  • The Clinton foundation did not sabotage Hillary's campaign

    The Clinton foundation did not sabotage Hillary's campaign. Hillary, and her leftist, bordering on Marxist, policy is the reason she failed to win the election. In spite of what the mainstream press would have you believe, Hillary's loss has more to do with backlash over political correctness that has been stuffed down our throats.

  • No, it did not.

    The public's perception of the Clinton's, the scandals that Bill Clinton has been involved in, as well as the fact that the clinton campaign ignored the large number of people who are stuck in dead end jobs and want some kind of a change are some of the things that caused Hillary Clinton to lose.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.