As much as (at least most of us) respect Bob Woodward; let's make no
mistake about it.....Bobby is a Secular Progressive liberal and although at
least a Secular Progressive Liberal who possesses some common sense;  the
operative words here are, "Secular Progressive Liberal"





On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 11:49 AM, geoffrey theist <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Investigation is a misnomer when used in a sentence with FBI.
>
> On Oct 30, 2016 10:42 AM, "'Perplexed' via PoliticalForum" <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Apparently Bob is misinformed. The Clinton Foundation IS being
>> investigated for criminal activity by he FBI.
>>
>> On Sunday, October 30, 2016 at 9:08:00 AM UTC-4, MJ wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Oct 24, 2016 7:25 AM
>>>
>>> *Watergate's Bob Woodward: "Clinton Foundation Is Corrupt, It's A
>>> Scandal" *by Tyler Durden
>>>
>>> It's one thing for the right-wing press to accuse the Clinton foundation
>>> of cronyism, corruption, and scandal ( especially if the facts
>>> <http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-07/clinton-foundation-charity-fraud-epic-proportions-analyst-charges-stunning-takedown>,
>>> and internal admissions by affiliated employees, confirm as much
>>> <http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-22/meet-man-who-can-expose-real-hillary-clinton-scandal>)
>>> - it tends to be generally ignored by the broader, if left-leaning, media.
>>> But when the Watergate scandal's Bob Woodward, associate editor at the
>>> liberal Washington Post, says very much the same, Hillary Clinton's
>>> campaign has no choice but to notice. This is precisely what happened today
>>> when journalist Bob Woodward told a Fox News Sunday panel
>>>
>>> *that the Clinton Foundation is "corrupt" and that Hillary Clinton has
>>> not answered for it. *Here, courtesy of RealClearPolitics, is the
>>> transcript of today's exchange:
>>>
>>> CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS SUNDAY: Then there are the allegations about the
>>> Clinton Foundation and pay to play,which I asked Secretary Clinton about in
>>> the debate, and she turned into an attack on the Trump Foundation.   But,
>>> Bob, I want to go back to the conversation I was having with Robby Mook
>>> before. When -- when you see what seems to be clear evidence that Clinton
>>> Foundation donors were being treated differently than non-donors in terms
>>> of access, when you see this new -- new revelations about the $12 million
>>> deal between Hillary Clinton, the foundation, and the king of Morocco, are
>>> voters right to be troubled by this?   x BOB WOODWARD, THE WASHINGTON
>>> POST: I -- yes, it's a -- it’s corrupt. It's -- it’s a scandal. And she
>>> didn't answer your question at all. And she turned to embrace the good work
>>> that the Clinton Foundation has done. And she has a case there. But the
>>> mixing of speech fees, the Clinton Foundation, and actions by the State
>>> Department, which she ran, are all intertwined and it's corrupt. You know,
>>> I mean, you can't just say it's unsavory. But there's no formal
>>> investigation going on now, and there are outs that they have.   But
>>> the election isn't going to be decided on that. I mean Karl was making the
>>> point about this, I'm not going to observe the result of the election. I
>>> mean that's -- that’s absurd. I mean it has no consequence. If Trump loses,
>>> they're not going to let him in the White House. He’s not going to have a
>>> transition team. And -- and to focus on that, I think, is wrong. I think
>>> the issue is, what's going to be the aftermath of this campaign.
>>>
>>> So it's corrupt, it's a scandal, and... it will have no consequences at
>>> all. It's time to look up the latest definition of Banana republic again.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/10/23/bob_woodwa
>>> rd_on_clinton_foundation_it_is_corrupt_she_didnt_answer_the_
>>> question.html
>>>
>>> http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-23/watergates-bob-wood
>>> ward-clinton-foundation-corrupt-its-scandal
>>>
>> --
>> --
>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>
>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "PoliticalForum" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
> --
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PoliticalForum" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to