Rand Paul: Foreign donations to Clinton Foundation ‘thinly veiled bribes’

[FSP-Rebel]

Rand Paul: Foreign donations to Clinton Foundation ‘thinly veiled bribes’

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) told POLITICO on Friday that foreign contributions to the Clinton Foundation are “thinly veiled bribes,” and said Hillary Clinton should return any donations from Saudi Arabia or other countries that abuse the rights of women.

“The normal Clinton response is to cover up, deny, refuse to acknowledge,” Paul said in a telephone interview as he was being driven through New Hampshire. “But the question is whether the country will rise up and respond to the unseemly nature of accepting foreign donations. “
Story Continued Below

Paul said that in addition to Saudi Arabia, the foundation should return donations from the United Arab Emirates and Brunei.
“In countries that stone people to death for adultery and imprison people for adultery, this is the kind of thing you would think someone for women’s rights would be standing up against, instead of accepting thinly veiled bribes,” the senator added.

More...http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/rand-paul-hillary-clinton-saudi-arabia-116269.html

 

[limequat]

Damn, that's gonna sting.

 

[francisco]

I love it... I have this wonderful mental image of Hillary with smoke coming out of her ears.

Bring it, Rand!

 

[Warlord]

bring it !

 

[Ronin Truth]

Ya think? Is that the Clinton way?

(yes)

 

[thoughtomator]

I don't see it.

Where's the veil?

 

[specsaregood]

Where's the veil?

Inside the metaphor regarding women's rights in Saudi Arabia.

 

[Sola_Fide]

I really like that Rand is on the offensive. Really impressed by that. I wish Ron would have done that.

 

[Stratovarious]

It's sad enough that the Hillarys of the world are bought and paid for my Corporations , sadder yet to see them beholden to foreign countries.

, ,
.

 

[francisco]

Positive article now posted at HotAir:

Rand Paul: Clinton Foundation took “unconscionable” donations during Hillary’s time as SecState

posted at 5:31 pm on March 21, 2015 by Ed Morrissey

While most of the media attention has gone to the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal, Rand Paul seized upon what may be the bigger problem for the Clintons — their family foundation and its foreign backers. Paul attacked Hillary for accepting big cash influxes from regimes that oppress women far more than her protestations over pay equity in the US (a subject on which her hypocrisy is nearly infinite). Those connections between the Clinton Foundation and countries such as Brunei and Saudi Arabia are “unconscionable,” Paul declared, and recommended that the foundation give the cash back, the Hill’s Jesse Byrnes reports from an interview in the Courier-Journal:

Link to above-cited article & video in Louisville (KY) Courier-Journal:

http://www.courier-journal.com/videos/news/politics/rand-paul/2015/03/21/25133953/

...Paul is seizing on the most problematic of subjects for the Clintons, one that has percolated in the media but not yet reaching the same pitch as the secret e-mail system. For a lot of voters, the issues of e-mail, accountability, and oversight will sound like Beltway process issues; they’ll reinforce the perception of arrogance from the Clintons, but it’s smoke without the fire. Taking millions of dollars from oppressive regimes for the family foundation, one that served to employ operatives like Dennis Cheng in between campaigns, is the actual fire...

Read more:

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/03/...e-donations-during-hillarys-time-as-secstate/

 

[Koz]

I really like that Rand is on the offensive. Really impressed by that. I wish Ron would have done that.

I like rand on the offensive too, but I really don't think Hillary will wind up being the nominee. Too much baggage, others will eventually get in and someone else will win it. So, is Rand attacking Hillary wasted effort if she is not the nominee? Or does it enhance his rep as able to challenge the Dem nominee no matter who it is?

 

[whoisjohngalt]

I like rand on the offensive too, but I really don't think Hillary will wind up being the nominee. Too much baggage, others will eventually get in and someone else will win it. So, is Rand attacking Hillary wasted effort if she is not the nominee? Or does it enhance his rep as able to challenge the Dem nominee no matter who it is?

I think you're wrong about that, but that is part of the point of attacking her now. If it damages her enough to allow someone else the nomination, it would be a huge boon to Rand (hopefully) or whoever the nominee is. They all poll much better in a general against a non-Clinton nominee.

Bring on Warren or Biden. Please.

 

[SilentBull]

What I love about this, is that it's not just about hypocrisy. I think Rand is reminding people what a REAL war on women looks like, to make these Dem attacks look ridiculous.

 

[alucard13mm]

Most feminazis have their priorities all messed up. Women has it good in the west, while millions of women in many countries are 3rd class citizens, property, slaves, baby machines and etc. Will fems fight for their sisters in those countries? Probably not. What they might do is send male troops over to do the fighting and dying.

I think rand is on the right track on attacking hillary while talking about women rights of women from those countries.

 

[JK/SEA]

Al Gore is waiting in the wings if Hilliary falls on her ass...

 

[phill4paul]

Rand needs to watch this as it can easily be spun.

 

[limequat]

Al Gore is waiting in the wings if Hilliary falls on her ass...

Sounds like this Omalley guy is their back-up plan.