3 ms·

I'll take the New York Times over an organization who's founder embezzled money to pay for escort services. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowe

I'll take the New York Times over an organization who's founder embezzled money to pay for escort services. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clin...

akhilcacharya 9y ago
The snopes article directly cites the NYTimes article. The entire ordeal is totally blown out of proportion (read: intentionally misread by the same people that think the DNC emails were damning), given Hillary had barely anything to do with it.
- KekDemaga 9y ago
  Payments made to Clinton tied organizations by Russian banks who profited off of a uranium deal days after the ink had dried = Nothing to see here Cyrillic characters in a binary = Definitive evidence
  - akhilcacharya 9y ago
    Secret meetings with Kremlin-linked individuals days before the DNC hacks were first released and lying about why they were set up - nothing to see here. Emails talking about collaboration with Russian government during the campaign to obtain damning information about Hillary Clinton released by his own son - nothing to see here. Firing the director of the FBI "because of the Russia investigation" according to the man himself - nothing to see here. Repeatedly downplaying the influence of Russia in Ukraine and changing the GOP platform after hiring a pro-Russian political operative to be his campaign manager - nothing to see here. Repeatedly disagreeing with the evidence provided by American intelligence agencies and dozens of cybersecurity firms while agreeing with the statements of Russian intelligence after being president - nothing to see here. Having a national security advisor who sat at the same table as Vladimir Putin in December 2015 during a gala for the state propaganda network - nothing to see here. Having the same national security advisor lie about meeting the Russian ambassador - nothing to see here. Having a campaign operative in Roger Stone (who he still in contact with) openly allege that he has a backchannel with Julian Assange - nothing to see here. Peter Smith coordinating with Russian hacker groups, only to kill himself a few weeks after telling the WSJ? Nothing to see here! ....but a highly regarded charity founded by one of the most popular presidents in recent history raising money...now, that's a scandal! I'll be honest, if our enemies are this afraid of someone, I want that person on my side.

akhilcacharya 9y ago

The snopes article directly cites the NYTimes article. The entire ordeal is totally blown out of proportion (read: intentionally misread by the same people that think the DNC emails were damning), given Hillary had barely anything to do with it.

KekDemaga 9y ago
Payments made to Clinton tied organizations by Russian banks who profited off of a uranium deal days after the ink had dried = Nothing to see here Cyrillic characters in a binary = Definitive evidence
- akhilcacharya 9y ago
  Secret meetings with Kremlin-linked individuals days before the DNC hacks were first released and lying about why they were set up - nothing to see here. Emails talking about collaboration with Russian government during the campaign to obtain damning information about Hillary Clinton released by his own son - nothing to see here. Firing the director of the FBI "because of the Russia investigation" according to the man himself - nothing to see here. Repeatedly downplaying the influence of Russia in Ukraine and changing the GOP platform after hiring a pro-Russian political operative to be his campaign manager - nothing to see here. Repeatedly disagreeing with the evidence provided by American intelligence agencies and dozens of cybersecurity firms while agreeing with the statements of Russian intelligence after being president - nothing to see here. Having a national security advisor who sat at the same table as Vladimir Putin in December 2015 during a gala for the state propaganda network - nothing to see here. Having the same national security advisor lie about meeting the Russian ambassador - nothing to see here. Having a campaign operative in Roger Stone (who he still in contact with) openly allege that he has a backchannel with Julian Assange - nothing to see here. Peter Smith coordinating with Russian hacker groups, only to kill himself a few weeks after telling the WSJ? Nothing to see here! ....but a highly regarded charity founded by one of the most popular presidents in recent history raising money...now, that's a scandal! I'll be honest, if our enemies are this afraid of someone, I want that person on my side.