It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: imwilliam
Setting aside the legality of it for a moment.
I confess, I'm completely baffled by the notion that its somehow ethically "ok" for appointed officials, elected officials or government employees to accept money from foreign donors, no matter how many shell companies, corporations or charities it's funneled through.
I'd appreciate anyone that thinks it's ok to explain their rational. I mean what am I missing?
originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed
Yes, could you clarify the issue with the donation and what if any favors Qatar received that are above and beyond what they normally would get as an ally to the US.
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed
And by the way, it isn't really called "pay to play" it's called BRIBERY and it's a felony when you take money in exchange for favors while working at the state department, and especially if you are secretary of state.
Still looking in to this issue, but can you point out the "favors" that were extended by the Clinton SD?
originally posted by: xuenchen
originally posted by: glend
Qatar is one of the countries that have been supporting ISIS against Libya and now Syria,
Gee this world is f***** up.
Qatar stands to make trillions of dollars if they can ever get a natural gas pipeline to Europe.
That pipeline needs to go through Syria of all the places !!!
originally posted by: Pyle
Um.. You guys know we have had a military Base in Qatar since 1999 right? We had been an ally with them for years before Clinton became SoS. I am not sure what your angle is... Are you trying to Push Pay-to-Play or what?