Hillary Clinton — Page 5

"In exchange for giving (not loaning) them the money, I'd want some say in how the money was to be utilized. Is that an unreasonable expectation?"

It depends. Some gifts don't come with strings attached . However, I'm acquainted with a restricted endowed professorship at my alma mater that went horribly wrong when the search committee didn't follow the terms of the agreement to the letter. Messy litigation ensued with accusations of invading the endowment before a settlement was reached.

henrikegerman wrote up-thread: "With so little truth coming from anywhere, the only choice seems to be to give up trying to make head or tail of it."

That's my take-away exactly. It's all rather byzantine with the byproduct being a ton of free publicity for Donna's book. Her publisher couldn't be happier. Let's follow the money here:

1. Donna's literary agent is Javelin, a firm whose founders have ties to Donald Rumsfeld and Tucker Carlson of Faux News. About Javelin

2. The book's publisher is Hatchette Books a French conglomerate that's also a huge English-language publisher. About Hatchette Book Group

Edited, thanks to henrikegerman

Updated On: 11/6/17 at 01:23 PM

"Does it also amaze you that 37% of Americans still think a buffoon like Trump is doing a great job? Have you always wondered why Republicans in Alabama think a judge who's been involuntarily removed from the bench twice for defying the orders of a federal court and believes homosexuality should be illegal is the right choice to represent them in the Senate? Lots of things to be amazed by and wonder about, wouldn't you say?......... lol"

Sure there are lots of things that amaze me in this world today but I was responding about a person who was mentioned in thread and not going off the subject like you just did.

" could have sworn you were the one who introduced a discussion of what amazes you and what you wonder about and I was merely expanding on the topic you raised, not going off subject. Clearly my mistake. Apologies.....lol."

See below. This is what I responded to which to me was not really raising the subject of what amazes me. IMO, I was kind of agreeing with the person who posted it.

"maybe because they're women, but also because they're the same old ineffective losers that along with Debbie Wasserman Schultz, have dragged this party down"

"That three of the most prominent were Clinton, Schultz, and Pelosi was merely coincidence. I'll add Schumer to that list to balance it. We lost because a lot of people disliked Clinton and the Clintonites in here can't face the truth. "

I don't get why people don't understand Clinton fatigue, I think a bunch people are just sick of them. To balance it out, the same thing was true with Jeb Bush, people have had enough of the Bush family. Democrats finally lucked out and Harry Reed retired but than they get Schumer as the Senate Minority leader. I am not a Democrat but they need to throw Pelosi out of her leadership position the way Republicans basically got rid of John Boehner.