Daily Commentary – Wednesday, July 1, 2015 – University of Missouri Balks at Hillary Clinton’s Celebrity Speaker Fee

  • In 2014 when the University of Missouri was looking for a speaker to headline a gala for a Woman’s Hall of Fame, they decided Hillary’s $275k fees were a “bit” high. They settled for Chelsea who only charged $65k

Daily Commentary – Wednesday, July 1, 2015 Download

Former President George W. Bush Has a Greater Favorability Rating Than Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama

MISS HIM YET?

According to a recent CNN/ORC poll, former President George W. Bush has a greater favorability rating than both Barack Obama and 2016 Democrat wannabe president Hillary Clinton. GWB has a 52% favorably and 43 unfavorable … Obama has a 49% favorable and 49% unfavorable rating and a job approval of 45% approve, 52% disapprove. George W. Bush even polls better than the presumptive Democrat 2016 presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

The complete poll can be read HERE.

Poll_Bush_Clinton_Obama

Click on pic to enlarge

President Barack Obama’s job approval numbers are sinking as American attitudes about the nation’s progress have taken a turn for the worse, according to a new CNN/ORC poll.

A majority of the public once again say things in the U.S. are going pretty badly and disapproval of Obama’s job performance has climbed back above 50% as well.

In fact, former President George W. Bush is more popular than Obama.

According to the poll, 52% of adults had a favorable impression of George W. Bush, 43% unfavorable. When Bush left office in 2009, only about one-third of Americans said they had a positive opinion of him. This new poll presents a notable shift as Bush’s overall favorability has remained well below 50% for much of his time as a presidential alum.

GWB_miss_me_yet

Miss Me Yet?

Overall, 47% say things in the country are going well, 52% that they’re going badly. That’s a reversal from March, when 53% said things were going well, the highest share to say so during Obama’s presidency. The shift comes across partisan and demographic lines, with no one group’s opinions driving the overall change.

Obama’s approval rating has suffered a similar blow.

While it’s dropped since April, going from a near-even 48% approve to 47% disapprove split to a negative-tilting 52% disapprove to 45% approve, the rising disapproval ratings come across party lines, from both men and women, from whites and non-whites.

Poll Shows that Democrat Front Runner Hillary Clinton is Not Honest and Trustworthy

IMAGINE THAT, HILLARY CLINTON IS NOT HONEST OR TRUSTWORTHY …

According to USA Today, the people do not view Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democrat presidential nominee for 2016, as honest or trustworthy. Say it isn’t so. They point two two polls, a CNN/ORC and ABC News/WAPO, where both show that more and more people believe she cannot be trusted. For the first time since declaring her 2016 run her unfavorable rating is now higher than her favorable. And you wonder why she refuses to answer the media’s questions or meet with We the People, without first having them cheery-picked. Could this be problematic for Hillary going forward as her credibility rating continues to go down? The story also discusses Jeb Bush’s polling issues as well; however, he is not the far and away front-runner of the GOP.

Hillary Clinton and die hard Democrats would say, what difference does it make, but Independents in a general election might have another thing to say when deciding their vote for an individual who obviously has trust issues, see Benghazi-gate, private email-gate, private server-gate and Clinton Foundation-gate, just to name a few.

Hillary Clinton5

Scouts honor, I am truthful. Ok, I lie, but what difference does it make.

A CNN/ORC poll  (pdf HERE) shows that Clinton — dogged by questions about missing emails and big-money contributions to Bill Clinton’s foundation — has seen her numbers drop on such issues as trustworthiness.

“A growing number of people say she is not honest and trustworthy (57%, up from 49% in March), less than half feel she cares about people like them (47%, down from 53% last July) and more now feel she does not inspire confidence (50%, up from 42% last March),” CNN reports.

Hillary Poll_CNN 060215_2

Hillary_poll_CNN 060215

An ABC News/Washington Post survey shows similar problems for the Democratic front-runner.

“She’s slipped underwater in personal favorability for the first time since her unsuccessful run for the presidency in 2008,” ABC reports. “She’s deeper in the hole for honesty and trustworthiness — down 5 points in just two months and 12 points in the last year.”

Daily Commentary – Tuesday, June 2, 2015 – Hillary Clinton is a “Money Hungry Hypocrite”

  • According to former White House aide, Kathleen Willey who also claims that Bill Clinton sexually assaulted her in 1993

Daily Commentary – Tuesday, June 2, 2015 Download

State Department Begins Realease of Clinton Emails: Nearly 300 New Hillary Emails Released and It Confirm She Received Now-Classified Information on Private Email

Imagine that, a Hillary Clinton email document dump by the State Department on a Friday before a long Memorial Day holiday weekend.

HILLARY CLINTON, YOU GOT MAIL … The US State Department has released the first round of emails from Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state on Friday.  Spokeswoman Marie Harf said that the publication includes 296 emails given to a House committee investigating Benghazi. One thing that is now true, Hillary Clinton did received, what is now considered, classified information on her private email account that was stored on her unsecured private email server. Yet another reason why you don’t use a private email server as one never knows when unclassified info will become classified.

Read the emails HERE for yourself.

Hillary Clinton5

Scouts honor, I never received classified information in my private email account

The State Department released the first batch of emails from Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state on Friday, offering additional insight into how she reacted to the deadly attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi.

Spokeswoman Marie Harf said publication includes 296 emails given to a House committee investigating the 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya.

The documents cover emails between 2011 and 2012 related to the Benghazi facility and its security, and to the broader issue of a U.S. diplomatic presence in Libya.

The State Department is still reviewing 55,000 further pages of emails from Clinton’s private email account. They’ll be published on a rolling basis.

The Associated Press also revealed on Friday that Clinton received information on her private email server that has now been classified about the deadly attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi.

The email in question, forwarded to Clinton by her deputy chief of staff Jake Sullivan, relates to reports of arrests in Libya of possible suspects in the attack.

State Dept. Spox Claims Clinton Never Received Or Sent Classified Emails During Entire Tenure

Clinton Foundation Reveals $26 Million in Additional Payments of Previously Undisclosed Donations from Major Corporations, Universities & Foreign Sources

MORE CLINTON CORRUPTION …

If Hillary Clinton cannot run a foundation in an ethical manner, how the hell can anyone think or believe that she could run a country in kind? The Clinton Foundation is now revealing, ahead of the long Memorial Day holiday weekend, an undisclosed $24 million of additional payments from major corporations, universities and foreign sources.  How Clintonian. There is no way that this woman should ever be elected President. Character has to matter, ethics have to matter, being able to remotely tell the truth has to matter … Hillary Clinton has none. The Clinton Foundation has been nothing more than a “slush fund” for the Clinton’s to become rich. We also recently learned that apart from the Foundation, the Clinton’s made $25 million in speaking fees since January 2014. Quite the Democrat populist candidate, ain’t she?

Hillary Clinton unethical

The Clinton Foundation reported Thursday that it has received as much as $26.4 million in previously undisclosed payments from major corporations, universities, foreign sources and other groups.

The disclosure came as the foundation faced questions over whether it fully complied with a 2008 ethics agreement to reveal its donors and whether any of its funding sources present conflicts of interest for Hillary Rodham Clinton as she begins her presidential campaign.

The money was paid as fees for speeches by Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton. Foundation officials said the funds were tallied internally as “revenue” rather than donations, which is why they had not been included in the public listings of its contributors published as part of the 2008 agreement.

According to the new information, the Clintons have delivered 97 speeches to benefit the charity since 2002. Colleges and universities sponsored more than two dozen of these speeches, along with U.S. and overseas corporations and at least one foreign government, Thailand.

The payments were disclosed late Thursday on the organization’s Web site, with speech payments listed in ranges rather than specific amounts. In total, the payments ranged between $12 million and $26.4 million.

This becomes a major issue when payola for influence peddling is received by an individual who is running for the President of the United States, especially when she tried to hide who was making the donations. So much for transparency.

There’s nothing wrong with people cashing in. But when that person is the likely Democratic nominee, it raises questions.

That Hillary would be the nominee has been presumed for several years, so these payoffs take on a different meaning than the fat fees paid to speakers routinely. By classifying the payments as “revenue” instead of “donations,” the Clinton Foundation shielded the identity of the donors.

Powerline discusses another reason why Hillary Clinton should never be president.

LIAR!!! Hillary Clinton & Her Attorney David Kendall Caught in a Lie to the Benghazi Committee Regarding Clinton Email Accounts … hrod17@clintonemail.com

LIAR … HOW MANY LIES AND SCANDALS IS IT GOING TO TAKE TO DISCREDIT HILLARY CLINTON FROM RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT? HILLARY IS NOT FIT TO BE PRESIDENT

The New York Times, yes you read that correctly, the New York Times published Monday a story showing that while Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used another private email address other than the one that she and her attorney claimed they did. The article shows that Hillary Clinton was using a second email account to conduct business, hrod17@clintonemail.com. That is what Hillary Clinton and her attorney David Kendall told the Benghazi Committee headed by Trey Gowdy (R-SC).

Hillary_Clinton2

But what difference does it make that I am incapable of telling the truth?

The messages shown here are among roughly 900 pages of emails related to Libya that Hillary Rodham Clinton said she kept on the personal email account she used exclusively as secretary of state. These emails are related to memos she was sent in 2011 and 2012 by Sidney Blumenthal, a confidant who worked for the administration of former President Bill Clinton and who at the time was employed by the Clinton Foundation.

WE WERE TOLD THERE WAS NO SECOND EMAIL ADDRESS … GUESS WHAT AMERICA, HILLARY CLINTON LIED AGAIN.

Needless to say the DNC and the Benghazi Committee are very interested in this turn of events. However, it is the American people who should be more concerned. The below multiple emails show Hillary Clinton used the following email account “hrod17@clintonemail.com” while serving in the Obama administration as secretary of state.

Clinton’s attorney, David Kendall, had previously told Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) that that particular address had not “existed (see letter HERE) during Secretary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State. I guess it all depends on what “One” is or “Address” is.

“NOTE: On April 8, 2011, Clinton Messaged Jake Sullivan Using The Account ” hrod17@clintonemail.com. ”
(“Selected Libya-Related Messages From Hillary Clinton’s Personal Email Account,” The New York Times , 5/18/15)”

RNC Hillary email1

From the RNC

“NOTE: On January 5, 2012, Clinton Messaged Jake Sullivan Using The Account ” hrod17@clintonemail.com. ”
(“Selected Libya-Related Messages From Hillary Clinton’s Personal Email Account,” The New York Times , 5/18/15)”

RNC Hillary email2

From the RNC

“NOTE: On August 28, 2012, Clinton Messaged Jake Sullivan Using The Account ” hrod17@clintonemail.com. ”
(“Selected Libya-Related Messages From Hillary Clinton’s Personal Email Account,” The New York Times , 5/18/15)”

RNC Hillary email3

From the RNC

LIAR, LIAR!!!

In A Letter To Rep. Trey Gowdy, Clinton’s Attorney, David Kendall, Stated That ” hrod17@clintonemail.com ” Was “Not An Address That Existed During Secretary Clinton’s Tenure As Secretary Of State.”
(David E. Kendall, Letter To Rep. Trey Gowdy , 3/27/15)

RNC Hillary email did not exist

RNC Hillary email did not exist2

UPDATE I: Benghazi probe to focus on role of Sidney Blumenthal:

Hillary Clinton forwarded unsubstantiated intelligence on Libya from a family ally to top officials at the State Department, according to documents obtained by The New York Times.

Sidney Blumenthal, a longtime Clinton family counselor and, according to the Times, an employee of the Clinton Foundation at the time, sent the intelligence reports based on information he had gathered while working as an adviser to Constellations Group, a private consultancy.

That relationship is now under scrutiny from Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi. Committee sources confirmed to POLITICO that Gowdy plans to subpoena Blumenthal for a private transcribed interview to discuss the memos and his role as an adviser to Clinton while she led the State Department.

FAUX Apology From ABC News George Stephanopoulos … Could He Have been More Sarcastic and Snarky?

This is what happens when you have a liberal media that does not punish their own for liberal media bias …

In the wake of the media bias scandal where ABC’s George Stephanopoulos failed to make it known that he had donated $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation and at the same time running cover for the Clinton Foundation amidst its own scandal of taking foreign money as she was Secretary of State, Georgy Porgy decided to apologize for his actions. If you call it an apology. But it was not just that George Stephanopoulos, a former Clinton White House political operative, donated money to the Clinton Foundation, Stephanopoulos acted as the Clinton defender when interviewing Peter Schweitzer on his book Clinton Cash and went after the author claiming that he was bias.

But check out the VIDEO below and the less than sincere apology. Listen to his snarky and elitist tone when he says, “Even though I made them strictly to support work done to stop the spread of AIDS, help children and protect the environment in poor countries, I should have gone the extra mile to avoid even the appearance of a conflict.” In his effort to make an apology he basically says, but look at me, I am great, because even though I made these donations to save the word, no the planet … I should have gone the extra mile. PLEASE GEORGY, SPARE US THE DRAMA. You knew damn well, being a former Clinton operative and a political news correspondent that the Clinton Foundation was nothing more than a slush fund. Would it really have been that difficult to do some research and investigation to find what were the best charities for Aids, helping children or the environment, if you were actually being sincere? After all, you are supposed to be some kind of correspondent for the media, is it that difficult to do a Google search of best charities?

But when you have a news organization like ABC News defending such actions of bias and a lack of transparency to protect their own agenda of liberal bias in the media, what would one expect from an ex-Clintonista but a hollow apology.

Transcript:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Now, I want to address some news you may have seen about me. Over the last several years, I have made substantial donations to dozens of charities, including the Clinton Global Foundation. Those donations were a matter of public record. But I should have made additional disclosures on-air when we covered the foundation and I now believe directing personal donations to that foundation was a mistake. Even though I made them strictly to support work done to stop the spread of AIDS, help children and protect the environment in poor countries, I should have gone the extra mile to avoid even the appearance of a conflict. I apologize to all of you for failing to do that.

BUSTED … ABC News George Stephanopoulos Failed to Disclose $50K Donation to Clinton Foundation While Attacking Anti-Clinton Author Peter Schweitzer and Donations to the Clinton Foundations (Update: He Gave $75K)

CAN YOU SAY MEDIA BIAS … WHY SHOULD ANYONE THINK STEPHANOPOULOS HAS ANY INTEGRITY, HE CAME FROM THE CLINTON WHITE HOUSE.

As reported at the Washington Free Bacon, ABC News chief anchor George Stephanopoulos donated $50,000 to the Clinton Foundation in recent years. The contribution is publicly available information, but the host had not previously disclosed it to ABC viewers, despite taking part in on-air discussions about the Clinton Foundation and its controversial relationship with foreign donors. Oops, no media bias here or conflict of interest. How on earth does some one not disclose that they have a conflict of interest when discussing a news story like the funny money that funneled through the Clinton Foundation when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State of the United States? Especially when Stephanopoulos recently tried to discredit author Peter Schweitzer on the air about his book Clinton Cash which discusses questionable political donations to the Clinton Foundation. Um, those very donations that ‘Stephelupagus’ had made himself. And not a word of, oh by the way, or in full disclosure, I am a Clinton hack.

Really, it was an honest mistake to knowingly not disclose this information when during the interview below Stephanopoulos references Peter Schweitzer disclosed in his book. Something George did not. Honest mistake my butt. Watch the VIDEO below of the contentious interview between Stephanopoulos and Peter Schweitzer and George’s defense of the Clinton’s, rather than a fair and balanced interview.

Correction, he gave them $75,000.

ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos on Thursday acknowledged donating $50,000 to the Clinton Foundation, a contribution he did not disclose during recent broadcasts on the Clinton Cash controversy.

The ex-political adviser for former President Clinton gave $25,000 a year in 2012, 2013 and 2014, according to CNN Money.

ABC initially reported Stephanopoulos had donated $50,000, but the anchor forgot his $25,000 gift in 2012, bringing his total donations to $75,000 over three years.

“I made charitable donations to the foundation in support of the work they’re doing on global AIDS prevention and deforestation, causes I care about deeply,” Stephanopoulos said in a statement.

“I thought that my contributions were a matter of public record,” he said.

“However, in hindsight, I should have taken the extra step of personally disclosing my donations to my employer and to the viewers on air during the recent news stories about the Foundation,” he added.

Stephanopoulos did not reveal his past donations despite discussing the foundation’s financial dealings in news broadcasts late last month.

George Stephanopoulos has ZERO credibility.  The Clinton Foundation website lists Stephanopoulos as a 2014 grantee who gave between $50,001 and $100,000 total as of that year.

ABC News stands behind their darling George and says it was an honest mistake. Give me a break, WHEN IT COMES TO ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE CLINTON’S THE WORD “HONEST” CAN NEVER BE USED!

UPDATE I: On ‘GMA,’ ABC’s George Stephanopoulos Apologizes To Viewers.

I am so sorry if I do not believe your apology you made only after you got caught with your hand in the cookie jar.

The chief anchor of ABC News offered a brief mea culpa to viewers on the network’s top-ranked morning program over gifts he made to the non-profit Clinton Foundation but failed to disclose even as he covered topics on air related to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

“I should have gone the extra mile to avoid even the appearance of a conflict” by noting the donations on air, Stephanopoulos said Friday morning, about 18 minutes into the broadcast of “Good Morning America.”

ABC News policy, according to a person familiar with the situation,  allows its journalists to make donations to charities. Viewers, however, may not make that distinction, and the anchor’s actions have already invited criticism from political aficionados who wonder if he can interview Republican political candidates now that his contributions to a charitable organization run by leading Democrats is known.

ABC News has said it supports the anchor, calling his omission “an honest mistake.”

Daily Commentary – Tuesday, May 12, 2015 – I’ve Been Wondering What Hillary’s Position Would Be on Immigration

  • We found out last week that she would create a path to citizenship and that she was ready to use executive action to shield many more

Daily Commentary – Tuesday, May 12, 2015 Download

Next Page →

Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

 
 
  • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
  • Red (comments)
  • Dugga (technical issues)
  • Dana (radio show comments)
  • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Close
E-mail It