BloggeRhythms

At this point, there’s little doubt that the current POTUS has done more harm to his own constituency than Jimmy Carter, by far the worst holding that office to date. And now, Obama’s not only hammering another huge nail into the coffins of massive numbers of American workers, but aligning with Republicans to get it done.

 

Doina Chiacu of Reuters, reports that: “Top Republicans predicted on Sunday that both chambers of Congress would muster the votes to pass the "fast-track" authority sought by President Barack Obama to negotiate major trade deals, despite opposition from Obama's fellow Democrats.”

 

However, “Obama's aggressive defense of fast-track has put him at odds with the left wing of the Democratic Party, including Senators Elizabeth Warren, a leading liberal voice, and Bernie Sanders, who is challenging Hillary Clinton for the party's 2016 presidential nomination.” Warren and Sanders are outraged because, “many Democrats staunchly oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership because they fear trade liberalization will cost U.S. jobs.”

 

Thus, with 19 months or so left in his second term, one has to wonder what else Obama can do to further harm his core constituents. And even perhaps, switch party’s to get some help in doing so.

 

Item two, concerns the growing doubt about George Stephanopoulos’ neutrality as a newsman, which seems to be a moot consideration. Because, considering his close relationship to his former employer and idol, Bill Clinton, how could Stephanopoulos ever be unbiased? And if he truly was, why would left-leaning ABC keep him on its payroll?

 

Yesterday, according to nationalreview.com Byron York wrote in the Washington Examiner, “the danger signals about Stephanopoulos were evident nearly 20 years ago when he was hired by ABC News almost immediately after he left the Clinton White House. We know from his 1999 memoir that upon his departure in late 1996, he told Hillary Clinton that he loved her. York noted that for a few years ABC News put up a pretense of calling Stephanopoulos an analyst and assuring people he wouldn’t be reporting on politics: “He will not report the news,” an ABC spokesman assured York in 1999. But in 2002, Stephanopoulos was named the host of ABC’s Sunday-morning interview show This Week, and in short order he became ABC’s “chief Washington correspondent.”

 

Then, once again, readers added insightful and clever summations.

 

octagon999 wrote: “Wanna bet he ends up on the sHrillary campaign? Or if she wins, in her admin? (Gawd forbid!)

 

jpdell replied: “Maybe chairman of the FCC.”

Michael Hoggan added: “would be very surprised if he doesn't. Hillary prizes loyalty above all else.”

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

Bill McMorris writes in today’s Washington Free Beacon: “Big labor funneled millions of dollars in dues money to the Clinton Foundation, according to a new report. 

"U.S. Department of Labor's union financial disclosure reports reveal that Big Labor gave at least $2,034,500 in union general treasury funds to Clinton Foundations. Union treasuries are funded mostly by compulsory union dues or fees collected from workers who would be fired for refusing to pay," the NILRR report says. "As Mrs. Clinton became closer to her current run for president, donations amounts appear to have increased. 

“The Clintons have turned their foundation into a lucrative "slush fund," according to one charity watchdog group, and have received hundreds of millions of dollars from notable businesses, media personalities, and political luminaries. The family has maintained that none of those donations influenced her decisions as secretary of state and that the money is strictly philanthropic.”

What’s most interesting though, is that while the “family” maintains that “the money is strictly philanthropic,”  the “unions did not necessarily agree about the apolitical nature of the donations, according to NILRR. 

"Some of these 'donations' are categorized by the unions as 'political' on their financial disclosure report" to the Labor Department, the report says. 

“United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices, a national plumbers union, for example, poured in nearly $200,000 through two contributions in 2013; each of those donations was classified as a political activity.”

So, the good news for those seeking favor from the Clinton’s is that they can always be be bought, regardless. But on the downside, with payoffs reaching the millions in size, the cost of getting the Clinton’s attention keeps rising toward eight digit kickbacks to their rapidly growing sludge fund. 

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

In today's nytimes.com Op-Ed column, Maureen Dowd excoriates W. Bush and his Iraq policy, writing, ”It took a Herculean effort of imagination, manipulation and deception to concoct “the information” that propelled the invasion, occupation and destruction of a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.”

 

Ms Dowd then goes to build a case, whereas hind-sight is always 20/20, she cherry-picks history to prove her point that the war against Saddam should never have been fought. Her ultimate aim, it would appear, is using W’s policies and decisions to hoist sympathetic brother Jeb from the same petard, painting both Bush’s as unfit to serve as POTUS.

 

Reading the column could surely cause one to believe that Ms Dowd despises both Bush’s to the n’th extent, whereas she dragged up details regarding Iraq that most have likely forgotten some time ago. However, it’s also quite possible that despite her Bush dislike, she has another motive at work.

 

Because, in recent weeks, Ms Dowd’s been the brunt of many who believe her continual criticism of Bill Clinton and his wife has reached the level of harassment, and that the constant repetition of their misdeeds is beneath her level of reportage. But now, by having a Bush tirade to point to, Ms Dowd can go back to hammering Bill Clinton’s wife for months to come.

 

What’s also interesting is the commentary from readers, who as aficionado's of the New York Times, are well-written, intellectually impressive and well thought out. However, when it comes to the reality of what actually took place in Iraq after 9/11, though those readers opinions might be written brilliantly, they’re all very wrong.   

 

Which brings us to todays’ update on Bill Clinton’s wife., this one from usatoday.com.

 

Peter Schweizer headed a column, “Stephanopoulos, ABC have not fully disclosed Clinton ties.”

 

Mr. Schweizer then wrote: “Fact-driven, fair, aggressive journalism animates American politics. As an investigative journalist, I am accustomed to asking tough questions. When I publish, I expect tough questions in turn,

 

“That's not what ABC News This Week host and chief anchor George Stephanopoulos delivered when he interviewed me about my new book on the Clinton Foundation last month. There's a reason. Though Stephanopoulos belatedly disclosed$75,000 in donations to the foundation, he has yet to disclose his much deeper relationship with the Clinton Foundation.

 

“When Stephanopoulos invited me on his Sunday program, I knew that he had worked as a top adviser and campaign manager to President Bill Clinton in the 1990s, but I didn't know about his donations or his other ties to the foundation founded and overseen by the former president and his wife, potential future president Hillary Clinton.”

 

Mr. Schweizer then goes on to provide a significant amount of detail, illustrating specific evidence of the close relationship between Stephanopoulos and both Clinton’s, which leads to the following conclusion. 

 

Whereas the main-stream media is nothing more than a close partner of the left, and has been for many, many years, and Stephanopoulos himself worked in the Clinton White House, what on earth did someone as politically well-versed as Mr. Schweizer expect from him? 

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

A few days ago, it was mentioned here that Fox News continues to gain viewership while its liberal competition for audience keeps shrinking dramatically. The importance of the growing viewership, however, wasn’t illustrated here for any particular favoritism of Fox, but rather as an overall indication that the public in general appears to be moving toward a more conservative viewpoint. Especially among voters proclaiming to be “independent.”  

 

On the same subject, Fox once again today seems a bellwether of changing opinion, this time in the case of one of its staunchest liberals, Kirsten Powers, who’s written a new book “The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech”

 

The Amazon promotional blurb describes the book this way: “Lifelong liberal Kirsten Powers blasts the Left's forced march towards conformity in an exposé of the illiberal war on free speech. No longer champions of tolerance and free speech, the "illiberal Left" now viciously attacks and silences anyone with alternative points of view.  Powers asks, "What ever happened to free speech in America?"

 

Charles Krauthammer, a conservative and Pulitzer Prize–winning syndicated columnist, author of the #1 New York Times bestseller Things That Matter endorsed the book this way: "A searing and courageous indictment of the growing intolerance of the American left—written with passion and eloquence by one of the nation's most principled and fair-minded liberals. An important book on a subject many are simply too afraid to touch."

 

Interestingly though, two well-known voices on the left added their own confirmations of Ms Powers thoughts and opinions.

 

Ron Fournier, senior political columnist and editorial director of National Journal wrote: “Tolerance and free expression are founding values of our republic and yet they're under attack from the extreme wings of the American political spectrum. Shining a harsh light on the 'illiberal left,' Kirsten Powers exposes a grim campaign to silence speech. This is an important book."

 

Juan Williams, Fox News political analyst and New York Times bestselling author of Muzzled opined that, “Kirsten Powers explodes and skewers. 'The Silencing'—the demonizing and repression of different views, especially conservative views. Here is a liberal calling out other supposedly liberal people who claim to believe in free speech but tell all who disagree with them to shut up. Hallelujah—you are lucky to have this book in your hands!"

 

The preceding is not meant in any way to endorse the book, I haven’t even read it, and perhaps won’t. But, the fact that the author herself, along with two similar-minded high-profile left-leaning pundits have serious problems with the way that the left attempts to control information available to the public indicates significant displeasure with the tactics.

 

Therefore, coupling the growth of Fox News, the Republican landslide in the mid-term elections, along with unrest among ordinarily steadfast left-leaning loyalists in the media, indicates significant problems for Democrats in the upcoming presidential election.

 

It’s probably also why people quite close to the Democrat party, like George Stephanopoulos, keep sneaking it money. Because he knows better than most, they really need it. Now more than ever.

 

Which, of course, brings us to today’s  update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

 

Fox News confirmed Friday that, “Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton earned more than $25 million combined in speaking fees since January 2014.

 

“Clinton’s presidential campaign reported the income in a personal financial disclosure report filed with the Federal Election Commission. The form also shows that Hillary Clinton earned more than $5 million from her 2014 memoirs, “Hard Choices.” Each White House candidate is required to disclose a financial report."

 

The disclosure’s interesting because, Bill’s wife, “has started her campaign for president by painting herself as a champion for the middle class. 

 

“However, Republicans have scrutinized her about the wealth she and Bill Clinton have amassed since she left the White House. That includes their ability to command six-figure fees for delivering speeches and the finances behind the Clinton Foundation because of its acceptance of donations from foreign governments.”

 

So, as each day ensues, it’s extremely likely that both Clinton’s would dearly love to change the subject away from their innate desire to amass wealth above all else. However, their problem is that if the money-grubbing aspect of their existence is removed, there’s really nothing much left to talk about. Especially in her case where her personal accomplishments hover right around zero.

 

In closing, a friend from Massachusetts posted this on FB this morning.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

While politics generally attracts the lowest life-forms imaginable as participants, Democrats seem to be the bottom of the barrel due to illogical ideals coupled with unbridled avoidance of reality while pursuing irrational goals.    

 

An example of Democrat's unthinking reactions while trying to turn tragedy into political gains for themselves, took place Wednesday night on Fox’s “The Kelly File,” as follows: “First responders still scouring the wreckage for bodies didn’t stop politicians like New York Mayor Bill de Blasio and Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y., from immediately laying blame for the crash on Congress and a lack of infrastructure funding.”

 

Another, simpler, approach however might be to put some blame on the engineer suspected of being in a blackout while going 100 MPH in a 50 mph zone.

 

In that regard, Rush mentioned the incident on yesterday’s show, addressing a comment by Speaker Boehner. 

 

“RUSH: Let's go to Boehner this afternoon in Washington.  He was speaking at a press briefing and an unidentified female infobabe said to the Speaker of the House, "There's been some criticism, you know, you're getting from Democrats that Amtrak wasn't well-funded enough and that the Republicans are to blame for some of this." 

 

“BOEHNER:  Are you really gonna ask such a stupid question? Listen, you know, they started this yesterday. "It's all about funding. It's all about funding."  Well, obviously it's not about funding.  The train was going twice the speed limit.  Adequate funds were there.  No money's been cut from rail safety.”

 

The infobabe’s blatant attempt at smearing Republicans with ridiculous premises’ may be a reason that left-leaning networks are losing viewers in droves. Because underestimating audiences intelligence, coupled with “stupid questions” seems to be causing the following results.

 

According to mediaite.com/t staff, “MSNBC had its lowest total day ratings in close to 10 years with 49K average viewers in the demo over the course of the day. The last time MSNBC saw demo ratings this low was on July 20, 2005 when it had 45K in total day.

 

“In primetime, MSNBC also came in third place with just 76K in the demo compared to 337K for Fox News and 196K for CNN.”

 

Thus, while those on the left, including the POTUS, go out of their way to belittle, degrade and denigrate Fox, writing it off as a radical outlet, audience-wise those radicals are eating the liberals lunch.

 

While Fox News almost doubled CNN’s audience, there are those believing that Fox goes overboard toward the conservative side while claiming to be “fair and balanced.” And although that might be true to some extent, it doesn’t even come close to networks like ABC where, according to FoxNews.com, “News chief anchor George Stephanopoulos never disclosed to his network -- or viewers -- $50,000 in contributions he made to the Clinton Foundation in recent years, even as he waded into covering Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign and foundation controversies.”

 

Furthermore, since yesterday the contribution amounts been found to be even higher, presently at $75,000. Which leads one to ask if anyone thinks there's’ no bias in this guy, who not only favors his former boss, Bill Clinton, but gave him $75 grand to prove it.

 

On another subject, while news of the pending Iranian deal is in a temporary news hiatus, Phil Stewart and Jonathan Saul of Reuters report that, “Iranian naval vessels fired shots at a Singapore-flagged tanker in the Gulf on Thursday, in what appeared to be Iran's latest attempt to settle a legal dispute by force with passing commercial vessels, U.S. officials said.

 

“The incident unnerved the shipping industry just as President Barack Obama met with Gulf allies to try to allay their concerns that Iran would be empowered by a deal to curb Tehran's nuclear program in exchange for the West lifting sanctions.”

 

While “the White House, Pentagon and State Department declined to confirm emerging details about the episode but acknowledged concern about Iran's conduct, White House Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes said, "This is exactly the type of challenge that many of the (Gulf) partners are focused on.”

 

Reading and re-reading Ben Rhodes comment kept leading to the same conclusion on my part, whereas after considerable thought, I still don’t understand what he’s talking about.  

 

And now, today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

 

According to WashEx.com: “A major Clinton Foundation donor who stood to profit immensely from the highly scrutinized takeover of Uranium One by the Russian government struggled to explain his involvement with the charity under questioning Tuesday. Frank Holmes, one of several investors cited in a New York Times article about the deal, attempted to dismiss allegations that he had donated to the Clinton Foundation in an effort to secure Hillary Clinton's approval for the 2010 transaction during an interview on CNBC's ‘Squawk Box.’”

 

As it turned out, this guy fit perfectly into the Clinton mold for  questionable veracity, whereas, “Several of his claims directly contradicted statements that flashed on the screen while he was speaking. A fact box on the screen indicated U.S. Global Investors, of which Holmes is CEO, held $4.7 million in shares of Uranium during the first quarter of 2011. But Holmes said his company was ‘long gone before 2008.’”

 

So, if the next few words don’t make sense, it’s my fault because  this fraud, Holmes, has me hysterical and I never learned how to type while laughing out loud. 

 

In closing, a friend posted this on FB yesterday.

 


That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Not being a politician, nor involved in government in any way at all, there are things that take place in foreign policy that simply make no sense to me at all.

 

According to Julie Pace of myway.com, today, “President Barack Obama and leaders from six Gulf nations are trying to work through tensions sparked by the U.S. bid for a nuclear deal with Iran, a pursuit that has put regional partners on edge.”

Now, here’s the confusing part: “Obama is seeking to reassure the Gulf leaders gathering at Camp David that U.S. overtures to Iran will not come at the expense of commitments to their security. He is expected to offer them more military assistance, including increased joint exercises and coordination on ballistic missile systems.”

However, if this Iranian nuclear deal makes so much sense that he’s battling uphill against world-wide objections, including huge fears here at home in the US, why does he need to assure neighboring nations that he’ll “provide more military assistance, joint exercises and coordination on ballistic missile systems,” to help protect them?

Because, if protection’s going to be needed, why not just shut the Iranian nuclear program down in the first place like any rational leader would do in a case like this.

Which leads right into another leading Democrat’s confusing view of the way things ought to work.

 

Erica Werner also on myway.com writes that, “House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi predicted Wednesday that Republicans will "rue the day" if the Supreme Court buys their arguments and invalidates tax subsidies for millions of people under President Barack Obama's health care law.”

 

On the other side, “Republicans have said they will try to ensure people don't lose insurance if the high court rules this summer against tax subsidies for health care coverage in certain states. But they haven't said how they would do it.”

Ms Werner goes on, “Such a ruling would present a major challenge to the GOP. Without a congressional fix some 8 million people could lose subsidies, which help them pay for their health insurance.

"They're now going to then go out and say we're going to take subsidies away from people who have health care?" Pelosi said in an interview with The Associated Press in her office overlooking the Supreme Court. "No, I don't think so."

And now, here’s the confusing part, which pertains to Nancy Pelosi's warning about Republicans ruing the day if the court “buys their arguments." Because, as far as health care coverage goes, it’s highly doubtful that those covered now will lose anything at all, regardless. However, vote-wise, the 8 million in question certainly don’t vote Republican now, meaning nothing will be lost at the polls, while a significant number of independents will likely be gained.

Which makes one wonder if the former Speaker of the House ever thinks at all before she opens her mouth, because so far she’s never indicated she has whatsoever.

And that brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. This one sent by a friend in an email.

 

“Many people who may vote in the democratic primary election, if there is one and the general election in 2016 have no real knowledge of Mrs. Clinton or her accomplishments.  As a public service, I thought I would provide some input regarding her triumphs for consideration.

 

When Bill Clinton was president, he allowed Hillary to assume authority over a health care reform.  Even after threats and intimidation, she couldn’t even get a vote in a democratic controlled congress.  This fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million in cost for studies, promotion, and other efforts.

Then President Clinton gave Hillary authority over selecting a female attorney general.  Her first two selections were Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood – both were forced to withdraw their names from consideration.  Next she chose Janet Reno – husband Bill described her selection as “my worst mistake.”  Some may not remember that Reno made the decision to gas David Koresh and the Branch Davidian religious sect in Waco, Texas resulting in dozens of deaths of women and children.

Husband Bill allowed Hillary to make recommendations for the head of the Civil Rights Commission.  Lani Guanier was her selection.  When a little probing led to the discovery of Ms. Guanier’s radical views, her name had to be withdrawn from consideration.

Apparently a slow learner, husband Bill allowed Hillary to make some more recommendations.  She chose former law partners Web Hubbel for the Justice Department, Vince Foster for the White House staff, and William Kennedy for the Treasury Department.  Her selections went well: Hubbel went to prison, Foster (presumably) committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.

Many younger voters will have no knowledge of “Travelgate.”  Hillary wanted to award unfettered travel contracts to Clinton friend Harry Thompson – and the White House Travel Office refused to comply.  She managed to have them reported to the FBI and fired.  This ruined their reputations, cost them their jobs, and caused a thirty-six month investigation. Only one employee, Billy Dale was charged with a crime, and that of the enormous crime of mixing personal and White House funds. A jury acquitted him of any crime in less than two hours

Still not convinced of her ineptness, Hillary was allowed to recommend a close Clinton friend, Craig Livingstone, for the position of Director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of about 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, suddenly Hillary and the president denied even knowing Livingstone, and of course, denied knowledge of drug use in the White House.  Following this debacle, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office after more than thirty years of service to seven presidents.   

 

Next, when women started coming forward with allegations of sexual harassment and rape by Bill Clinton, Hillary was put in charge of the “bimbo eruption” and scandal defense.  Some of her more notable decisions in the debacle was:

·  She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit.  After the Starr investigation, they settled with Ms. Jones.

·  She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor.  After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs. 

 

· Hillary’s devious game plan resulted in Bill losing his license to practice law for lying under oath to a grand jury and then his subsequent impeachment by the House of Representatives.

· Hillary avoided indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice during the Starr investigation by repeating, “I do not recall,” “I have no recollection,” and “I don’t know” a total of 56 times while under oath.

· After leaving the White House, Hillary was forced to return an estimated $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork that she had stolen.    

 

What a swell party – ready for another four or eight year of this type low-life mess? 

 

Now we are exposed to: the destruction of possibly incriminating emails while Hillary was Secretary of State and the “pay to play” schemes of the Clinton Foundation – we have no idea what shoe will fall next.  But to her loyal fans – “what difference does it make?” 

 

So, once again, from a blogger’s point of view, just like the catchphrase, first known as a marketing slogan for the phonograph since 1924, she’s “The gift that keeps on giving.” Because, it looks like as long as she’s around, there’ll be something to write about for quite some time to come.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

The site for the president's library's now been picked, the South Side of Chicago. Which means that architects and planners can begin working on the structure’s layout and design.

While it will probably be some time before the public sees what’s actually being planned, it’s likely that copies of 8 years of Fox News broadcasts will be buried under the cornerstone. The entry might well be something like a Patricia Heinz arch, leading to a Kerry rotunda from which other sections branch off. 

 

The Buffett gallery will probably contain a tribute to the oil cars of the BNSF Railway, with a section devoted to the Keystone pipeline, although that section will actually never be completed. Across the hall there might be a Tom Steyer gallery dedicated to climate change, with the temperature in the space always above 100 degrees year round. 

Admission to the health care section will be free for those from the 47% percent of households who don't pay income taxes. All others will pay increasing entrance fees, according to annual income. A hallway from the tax assessment station will lead to the Al Sharpton tax alcove, however that entrance can never be found.  

The Netanyahu/Israeli room will be the smallest in the building, with plans to shrink it annually into the future. On the other side, the huge Iranian plaza will continually to expand in accordance with that nation’s territorial growth. An offshoot will be the Benghazi arcade with a full-time guide, Susan Rice.  

Although still quite early in the library’s planning stages, it should be quite interesting to see what actually develops regarding the construction. Unless only union workers are hired for the job, slowing the project into the next millennium. 

In the meantime, another issue indicates that Congress is sensing that the lame duck stage of the presidency has begun.

 

According to FoxNews.com, “President Obama suffered a defeat at the hands of his own party on Tuesday, as Senate Democrats blocked a key component of the president's trade agenda.

“After fierce lobbying on both sides of the issue, the bid to start debate -- on expanding the president's authority to negotiate trade deals -- failed on a 52-45 vote. It needed 60 votes to advance. 

The president's supporters will likely try again, but the vote nevertheless marks a stinging rebuke of a major Obama priority by members of his own party. Republicans mostly had aligned with Obama on the issue and, after the failed test vote, urged Obama's fellow Democrats to drop their resistance. 

"What we just saw here is pretty shocking," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said, accusing congressional Democrats of standing with "special interests.”

Then there was another validation of liberalism’s economic impossibility, whereas Moody's downgraded Chicago's credit rating to junk level "Ba1" from "Baa2."

Moody’s Tuesday announcement, cited a recent Illinois court ruling voiding state pension reforms, saying it saw a negative outlook for the city's credit. 

 

The key issue stated by Moody’s was, “Whether or not the current statutes that govern Chicago's pension plans stand, we expect the costs of servicing Chicago's unfunded liabilities will grow, placing significant strain on the city's financial operations absent commensurate growth in revenue and/or reductions in other expenditures." 

Thus, what we have here is an absolutely perfect example of what to expect for the nation as a result of the way that the Administration has permitted the unbridled growth of the national debt.   

Reader, Dusty Thompson, summed it up this way: 

 

“Ineptocracy: in-ep-toc’-ra-cy”

“A system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.”

Coincidentally, on the same day Alexander Hendrie at Americans for Tax Reform reports that: “Despite over $205 million in federal taxpayer funding, Hawaii’s Obamacare exchange website will soon shut down. Since its implementation, the exchange has somehow failed to become financially viable because of lower than expected Obamacare enrollment figures. With the state legislature rejecting a $28 million bailout, the website will now be unable to operate past this year.”

And now, today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

Dan Springer writes on FoxNews.com that, ”A sales plug in Russia in 2009, though, may have proved especially fruitful. While touring a Boeing plant, Secretary of State Clinton said, "We're delighted that a new Russian airline, Rossiya, is actively considering acquisition of Boeing aircraft, and this is a shameless pitch."

 

“In 2010, Boeing landed the Russian deal, worth $3.7 billion. And two months later, the company donated $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation. 

“Clinton defenders say there is no smoking gun. "There's zero evidence that Hillary Clinton went to bat for Boeing for any reason other than to benefit the U.S. economy and U.S. workers," said former Clinton/Gore adviser Richard Goldstein. 

“But the financial connections don't end there. Boeing also paid former President Bill Clinton $250,000 for a speech in 2012. It was a speech that was approved by the State Department's Ethics Office -- which according to an Associated Press report often approved the ex-president's speaking engagements within days.”

So, although it was a concern that committing to report a daily misdeed by Bill’s wife was attempting something probably not really possible. Because no one on earth could be that openly self-serving, greed driven and egotistically motivated. However, as things are going now, commenting on only one misdeed a day on her part may not be enough.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Not much new in the news today, many of the top stories focusing on Tom Brady and New England’s win in the Super Bowl. And although most readers here have no real interest in my opinions about sports, the following item should amuse everyone. It was sent by a  long-time friend in Massachusetts, with her comment: “Hmmm”

In an appropriate follow-up to the preceding photo of criminals, is today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife which includes several items.

 

To begin, New York Magazine reports. “After being the subject of a spate of negative newspaper accounts about potential conflicts of interest and management dysfunction this winter — long before Clinton Cash — the Clinton Foundation wound up on a ‘watchlist’ maintained by the Charity Navigator, the New Jersey-based nonprofit watchdog…. Navigator executives counter that the Foundation has demanded they extend the Clintons special treatment. They also allege the Foundation attempted to strong-arm them by calling a Navigator board member. ‘They felt they were of such importance that we should deviate from our normal process. They were irritated by that,’ says [former Navigator CEO, Ken Berger].”

 

FoxNews.com contributes another story on the same subject, reporting that, “During Hillary Clinton's tenure as the top U.S. diplomat, lawyers and other ethics officials in the State Department's Office of the Legal Adviser gave near-blanket approval to at least 330 requests for Bill Clinton's appearance at speeches, dinners and events both in the U.S. and around the globe. More than 220 paid events earned the family nearly $50 million, according to a review of State Department documents and Hillary Clinton's financial disclosure forms by The Associated Press. 

“Now, as Hillary Clinton moves forward with her presidential campaign, the ease with which her husband was repeatedly cleared to address companies and governments around the world highlights potential ethical complications that are likely to intensify if she becomes the country's next president.”

The article goes on, “Taken together, the State Department and financial disclosure documents show the agency sped through Bill Clinton's steady stream of requests for events while rarely raising concerns about potential conflicts. At the same time, the agency's ethics office, which had primary responsibility for the decisions, was hobbled by "strained program operations," according to a 2012 report by the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, the government's top ethics agency. 

“State Department ethics officials gave quick approval, for example, for the two Barclays appearances and events paid by other international banks under legal scrutiny. Bill Clinton's $200,000 appearance in Florida for British-based HSBC in 2011 was cleared despite an ongoing federal money-laundering investigation that led to a 2012 settlement with prosecutors.”

An example of the favor expected from the State Department can be seen in this demand for immediate action:  "This is overdue and our host needs a signed contract today," wrote Terry Krinvic, Clinton's director of scheduling, in a March 2, 2011, email to State Department officials.  A State Department official working on a speech request described herself in a February 2011 email as "totally stressed out, but will do it this afternoon." 

The article contains detailed information about Bill’s wife’s, stating that during her tenure “as the top U.S. diplomat, lawyers and other ethics officials in the State Department's Office of the Legal Adviser gave near-blanket approval to at least 330 requests for Bill Clinton's appearance at speeches, dinners and events both in the U.S. and around the globe. More than 220 paid events earned the family nearly $50 million, according to a review of State Department documents and Hillary Clinton's financial disclosure forms by The Associated Press. 

Here’s a link to the specifics: State Department OK'd most Bill Clinton speech requests within days

So, although the real campaign hasn’t even begun yet, each day’s disclosures seem to be taking their toll, as illustrated in Chris Stirewalt’s column on FoxNews.com. 

 

“Familiarity breeds disgust Republicans close in on Hillary in N.H. - A new Bloomberg Politics/Saint Anselm New Hampshire Poll says Republican presidential hopefuls Sens. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush now tie Clinton within the margin of error in hypothetical general election matchups.”

 

In conclusion, it looks like whoever the Republican presidential nominee winds up to be won’t even have to campaign for themselves. All that needs be done is to sit back, let the truths about the Clinton’ keep coming out, and gain landslide victory by default.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios