Just to remind people about how wonderful the Saudis are while the Donald is over there sucking Sheik dick....Out of the 19 hijackers on 9/11. 15 were Saudi nationals and there is ample evidence that they were Saudi financed. The US agreed to the biggest arms deal in history to sell the Saudi's weapons. A deal that Jared Kutchner, son-in-law of Trump negotiated. Negotiated down to the detail of calling the CEO of Lockheed Martin and asking for a discount for the poor Saudi's..............Coincidentally, the Saudi's chose that same time frame to donate a $100 million to a very shady fund that that Ivanka supports. :
The World Bank plans to announce Sunday at an event with Ivanka Trump, the U.S. president’s daughter and senior White House adviser, that Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates have pledged $100 million collectively toward a fund for women who own or want to start businesses, according to people familiar with the announcement............You know what would be a great help in supporting woman's human rights in Saudi Arabia? Giving women human rights. Don't tell me Obama didn't do this, or it's Hillary's fault. Tell me specifically what the Trump Admin will do to support human rights in the kingdom. Besides a 100 billion dollars in weapons.
Ms. Trump has made the promotion of women entrepreneurs a signature part of her focus since her father’s inauguration in January. She has advocated for issues such as paid family leave, though the issue has gained little traction in Congress. While she had proposed the idea of the World Bank fund, Ms. Trump doesn’t control it or raise money for it, one person familiar with the plans said.
What did the the Trump camp say about the Clinton Foundation on the same issue:
he donations and the White House are not tied. Definitely not. No way! It is a total coincidence the $100 million dollar donation is being made the same weekend a $110 billion arms deal is announced. And never mind that Ivanka Trump is traveling to Saudi Arabia in her official capacity as an ‘Assistant to the President of the United States.’
Let’s recall Donald Trump’s reaction when it came to the Saudis donating to the Clinton Foundation. From October 2016:
When Chris Wallace asked Clinton about reports of conflicts of interest at the foundation, she responded, "I'm thrilled to talk about the Clinton Foundation because it is a world renowned charity and I'm so proud of the work that it does."
Trump shot in that it's a "criminal enterprise."
"Saudi Arabia given $25 million, Qatar, all of these countries. You talk about women and women's rights? These are people that push gays off business, off buildings. These are people that kill women and treat women horribly and yet you take their money," Trump said. "So I'd like to ask you right now why don't you give back the money that you've taken from certain countries that treat certain groups of people so horribly?
Not that it's illegal or anything. Oh. Wait.
If true, this is egregious and potentially illegal, according to multiple ethics and legal experts. “If the donation would be a quid pro quo bribe, then asking for it is certainly solicitation of a bribe, which is every bit as criminal as the bribe itself,” Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe tells me via email. “But I started that sentence with ‘if’ because I don’t have enough facts about the donation request to opine on the ultimate bribe issue.” Nevertheless, he says:
At the very least, though, a donation is a “present,” which – if made by a foreign government or an agent of such a government or an entity controlled by it – is expressly banned by the text of the Foreign Emoluments Clause with respect to anyone holding “any Office of Profit or Trust” under the United States. Whether it counts as an “emolument” becomes irrelevant if it’s a “present,” which any donation would at least be.
Tribe explains, “Even if the First Daughter and Assistant to the President somehow manages to create formal distance between herself and that version of the Clinton Foundation, which of course her father denounced endlessly during the campaign, the hypocrisy of the move is jaw-dropping.” He adds, “Such contributions would surely constitute a financial benefit to … her brand, and her family’s brand even if she is unable to spend a penny of the contributions themselves. As such, soliciting such contributions violates at least the spirit of the Foreign Emoluments Clause.”
Even more explicitly, the Office of Government Ethics rules, former Republican ethics counsel Richard Painter tells me, “prohibit use of official position to solicit for ANY charity or other private entity.” The OGE guidelines specifically state: “Executive branch employees are subject to restrictions on the gifts that they may accept from sources outside the Government. Unless an exception applies, executive branch employees may not accept gifts that are given because of their official positions or that come from certain interested sources.” The rationale for this is obvious (except to Trump). “Even if a gift is from a person or organization that has no official dealings with the employee’s agency, accepting a gift offered because of the employee’s official position may create an appearance of using public office for private gain,” the OGE guidelines explain. “Moreover, if an employee receives a payment from an outside source in some circumstances, the public may believe that the employee is serving two masters or is distracted by outside activities.”...............And last but certainly not least. Michelle Obama did not wear a head scarf when she visited the kingdom. Awful, evil and horrible right?........What did Melania do?..................again HYPORCITE MUCH PUBES..........SHUT DOWN THE POLITICAL THREAD FUCK TRUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pages: 
The nonsense thread - Enter at your own risk! Warning… 100% off topic and full of nonsense inside (Read 902,554 times)
