That’s the kind of accusation that requires cites and/or links, not just FUD-stirring.
Jameson Quinn

That’s the kind of accusation that requires cites and/or links, not just FUD-stirring.

To start, Hillary Clinton got the most corrupt Commissioner of the FDA, ever, appointed:

Case 1:16-cv-00086-RJL Document 20 Filed 04/11/16 Page 1 of 82
TERRY ASTON, Baltimore, Maryland and JOHN FRATTI, Hummelstown, Pennsylvania and LINDA MARTIN, Phoenix, Arizona and DAVID MELVIN, Chatsworth, Illinois and JENNIFER WILCOX, Oroville, California Plaintiffs, v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, One Johnson & Johnson Plaza New Brunswick, New Jersey 08933 and JOHNSON & JOHNSON PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C., 920 Route 202 South P.O. Box 300 Mail Stop 2628 Raritan, New Jersey 08869 and ORTHO-MCNEIL-JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC

Which reads, in part: “Specifically, on or about May of 2009, President Barack Obama nominated Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg as a political appointee to become Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”). On information and belief, Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg was nominated as a result of huge political and other gratuities to Hillary Clinton and The Clinton Foundation, and at Mrs. Clinton’s recommendation. During the confirmation process before Congress, Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg, acting in concert with her husband, Peter F. Brown and the other Defendants named in this Amended Complaint, at all material times the Co-CEO of a hedge fund named Renaissance Technologies, L.L.C., failed to disclose to Congress and other relevant authorities, her and her husband’s clear-cut conflict of interest –specifically, that Renaissance Technologies, L.L.C. held hundreds of millions of dollars of Johnson & Johnson stock, the manufacturer of the deadly drug, Levaquin.

While Dr. Hamburg was serving her first term as FDA Commissioner, over 5,000 people died after taking Levaquin and other drugs sold by Johnson & Johnson, a Big Pharma conglomerate in which she and her husband held millions in equity through the hedge fund her husband was co-CEO of.

And the Clinton Foundation got its cut right up front.

Or how about: “Putting the Clinton Foundation in Context: Corruption Plain on the Face of It”, Amy Sterling Casil, Medium

“The Clinton Foundation touts its programs in Haiti, particularly mentioning the Haiti Coffee Academy. According to the Foundation, they purchased the property in Haiti in 2012 for $350,000. Gifts totaling this amount from the Leslois Shaw Foundation and Todd Carmichael are in the Clinton Foundation donor database from 2011. The “Academy” functions as a coffee farm for single-source coffee from Haiti that is sold by reality TV star Carmichael’s company La Colombe Torrefaction. This isn’t months of investigative journalism: it’s reading what they’ve written themselves in their own blog posts and advertisements. The Foundation, for whatever reason, whether personal connections, bribes or love of this guy’s coffee or show, bought the property so Carmichael could use it. It’s very difficult for non-Haitian private companies to buy and use land for their business there: easy for Clinton “Foundation.”

There have been hundreds of thousands of words, perhaps millions, written about the lack of performance of the Clinton Foundation in Haiti — and evidence of the ugly picture is in the fact that the best “program” the Foundation can come up with to feature after the hundreds of $millions were given after the Haiti earthquake is what I just documented — acting as a pass-through for funds to buy land for a boutique coffee company to single-source exotic coffee from one of the poorest countries on earth. Coffee that he sells using celebrity endorsements on his reality TV show on the Travel Channel.”


“As a side note, my organization was contacted regarding building actual housing in Haiti after the 2010 earthquake. We had only a few meetings before being told “don’t bother, the Clinton Foundation will be leading the efforts.” This effort ended up being about 20 moldy, substandard trailers laced with formaldehyde, provided by the same company that also constructed substandard, poisonous emergency housing after Hurricane Katrina. You will read articles to this day in major publications that blame Haitians. The company that did this to our country in New Orleans, and to Haiti, is owned by Berkshire Hathaway/Warren Buffett.”

Or: “Bill Clinton’s $300 Million Birthday Gift!” also by Amy Sterling Casil, Medium:

“While the Clinton Foundation states it spends nearly $25 million a year on gala meetings for Fortune 500 companies, global financiers, government officials and celebrities to pat themselves on the back, the Foundation states it is “catalyzing economic empowerment through agribusiness development” in its Development Initiative. This work is stated to “impact more than 105,000 farmers in Malawi, Rwanda, and Tanzania” to increase “their yields and incomes.”

So, we divide 105,000 into $4.48 million. That is a remarkably efficient cost of $42.69 cents per farmer “catalyzed.”One specific project mentioned is the Anchor Farm Project in Malawi. The Anchor Farm Project “integrates commercial farming and smallholder farmer outreach, providing farmers with access to inputs, agronomic knowledge, and markets.” It supposedly “reaches” 56,000 farmers with 76 “full time staff.”

So, if we divide this out, each of these staff members would be responsible to “reach” 737 farmers a year. Each staff member would be able to spend 2.8 hours with each farmer. That works out to a very generous Malawi wage of $15.2 an hour — except it also notes that there are over 400 part-time, seasonal “workers.”

None of that is real, however, The project was set to be managed and evaluated by the University of Illinois in 2014. There is no evidence the evaluation or management process took place; however, the job description for the evaluator is available on the internet. As with everything connected to the Clinton Foundation, the information about individuals and countries actually conducting work is grossly divergent from reality and what is provided on the Clinton Foundation website.

The goal was to try to “reach” 100,000 farmers by 2016. There were problems noted with the previous program and they were trying to accomplish something after failures. The University of Illinois program was seeking to work with a very ambitious 250 villages and a variety of farm demonstration and training programs.

This is the farm. If you have ever been around agriculture, that is a dry, fallow field and posed tractor. The actual operators are funded by USAID — this is from DevEx — that’s right it is NOT Clinton Foundation money directly it’s from the U.S. government and taxpayer. Again.

If you watch the video, the farm itself is 5 former or “defunct” tobacco farms — a total of 3500 hectares (8600 acres). And of course, the “goal” is to encourage “private investment.” If we divide the 56,000 “smallholder” farmers into the 8600 acres, each would be able to have .15 acre to farm. COOL BEANS! As in “bean plant” per farmer. Not quite that bad, but to understand how much .15 acre is — approximately 6500 square feet. Southern California averages about 3 house lots per acre. So, each farmer could have a plot about the size of a typical front or back yard in a suburban area.

Or: “From Whitewater to Benghazi: A Clinton Scandal Primer”, The Atlantic:

“If the Clinton Foundation’s strength is President Clinton’s endless intellectual omnivorousness, its weakness is the distractibility and lack of interest in detail that sometimes come with it. On a philanthropic level, the foundation gets decent ratings from outside review groups, though critics charge that it’s too diffuse to do much good, that the money has not always achieved what it was intended to, and that in some cases the money doesn’t seem to have achieved its intended purpose. The foundation made errors in its tax returns it has to correct. Overall, however, the essential questions about the Clinton Foundation come down to two, related issues. The first is the seemingly unavoidable conflicts of interest: How did the Clintons’ charitable work intersect with their for-profit speeches? How did their speeches intersect with Hillary Clinton’s work at the State Department? Were there quid-pro-quos involving U.S. policy? Did the foundation steer money improperly to for-profit companies owned by friends? The second, connected question is about disclosure. When Clinton became secretary, she agreed that the foundation would make certain disclosures, which it’s now clear it didn’t always do. And the looming questions about Clinton’s State Department emails make it harder to answer those questions.”

Or: “The Clinton Foundation Scandal Explained: Money, Power And Influence Questions Hound Hillary Clinton Campaign,” International Business Times

“The New York Times editorial board called for Clinton to cut ties with the Clinton Foundation before the November election in a scathing editorial published Tuesday. The foundation, established by former President Bill Clinton in 1997 to fund his presidential library, oversees a number of international charity programs ranging from efforts to end global hunger to campaigns to fight the effects of climate change.

Recently released emails suggest that at least some of the nearly $2 billion the foundation has raised from U.S. corporations, foreign governments and corporations, political donors, and various other groups was collected in exchange for special access to the State Department while Hillary Clinton was serving as secretary of state.”

But this isn’t my first rodeo rubbing a Clinton fan’s nose into facts. You’ll have an explanation for each and every article, every cite, every unflattering fact. But I gave you cites, articles and facts. Your reaction is your responsibility, not mine.