[ExI] The Clinton Foundation

John Clark johnkclark at gmail.com
Wed Aug 31 17:29:10 UTC 2016

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 2:14 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> ​> ​
> John, the problem with these lines of argument is that it tends towards
> ends-justify-the-means in government which is dangerous.
> ​Sometimes the ends justify the means and sometimes they don't. If the
ends never justify the means ​

​then nobody would ever do anything because there would be no way to do it.

​> ​
> Huma Abedin’s employment by the Department of State in 2012 in
> particular.  She was being paid as a GS12 by the State Department with GS6
> credentials and no supporting documentation to justify it.  This is
> contract fraud itself.

I don't know what you mean by "GS6 credentials". If you're hired for job X
​ then there is a set pay scale for that job and that's true ​
at the state department o
for any government job
​. Your boss gives you a job but he doesn't set your pay,
 you get the pay for the
GS scale
​says you should get​
 for that job.

> ​> ​
> Simultaneously she was on salary to the Clinton Foundation.  This is
> conflict of interest

​Perhaps but not illegal, and besides I ​

​don't give a hoot in hell about ​
Huma Abedin
​, she's not running for president.​

> ​> ​
> Everyone who deals in government contracts is trained in avoiding the
> appearance of impropriety,

​They may be trained in it, but every President , every member of the House
of Representatives, every Senator, and every state governor (including
Gary Johnson​
​)​  every mayor, and every city councilman has engaged in t
he appearance of impropriety
 they all accept campaign contributions
and those contributions help nobody but the candidate himself.
Contributions to the Clinton foundation help millions of people
​but ​
Hillary doesn't get a nickel of the money.

​> ​
> Note that none of this has anything to do with any of Mrs. Clinton’s
> opponents; her mainstream rival has never held any elected office.  Any
> mention of his name is a diversion

I disagree, ​I believe it has everything to do with her opponent, you
should always vote for the least bad person who has a chance to win. As I
have said it is infinitely (and I don't use that word lightly) more
important to avoid a apocalyptically bad president than it is to elect a
great one. We'll be fine if we get a mediocre president or even a bad one
provided she's not too bad, and who knows she might even be as good as her
husband was.

The charges brought against the two are grotesquely ridiculously

*On one side we have a man who wants to torture people for fun, build a
idiotic wall, renounce the national debt, and can't understand why we don't
use nuclear weapons more often.

*On the other side we have a woman who's assistant (that I've never heard
of until a few weeks ago) may have done something that has the appearance
of impropriety.

The magnitudes just don't match!   And I STILL don't understand why, with
the exception of my own posts, Hillary receives *at least* 10 times as much
criticism on this list as her opponent even though he would be the most
anti-free trade President in a century.,

> ​> ​
> So… Does Mrs. Clinton get a special pass?  Who else gets that?
​Every single elected official in the USA gets that special pass​

​without exception, and they got it for doing worse crimes than having a
friend donate to a philanthropic foundation. ​

​> ​
> Even if an organization does good deeds, it is required to follow
> established law.
> ​And despite thousands of people looking for decades nobody any clear
violation of established law

John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20160831/ed5128f1/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list