Gonna need to know who changed the thread title
Thread title is A+ IMO.
1 Like
Its kind of sexiest considering all of the Biden administration including him are corrupt…
Why did the Saudis give a shitload of money to the Clinton Foundation?
On the one hand, the US and Clintons already had very strong relations w/ the Saudis. On the other hand, the Saudi leaders are scumbags and maybe our relationship w/ them should change at some point. The Saudis made the payments so that the former would be the default position in the Clintons’ minds to the extent they had power to affect the relationship.
Same w/ Yellen and all the soft bribery that goes on via speaking fees in the US.
Who’ll speak up for the cheap bottles of wine being stored above ground?
All links are not the same, basically. Yes, it’s hard to find a Treasury Secretary that didn’t engage in some obviously stupid conflict of interest but that is not how it should be.
1 Like
Yeah i know he is corrupt along with 99.9% of our political class.
One of the sexism arguments going around is that the word “raked” is somehow uniquely misogynistic and emblematic of some sort of female-biased corruption reporting. That’s what this picutre speaks to. The misogyny part is straight up nonsense.
That was my joke…must be getting missed.
I did miss it , sorry
What’s the difference between Biden and Yellen collecting 8 and 7 figures in speaking fees and Pitbull being paid a fee to perform at the Goldman Sachs NYE party?
What’s the difference between me handing an envelope with $2k to the band that performed at my NYE party and me handing that same envelope to the cops that came to shut down my party?
11 Likes
Mr Worldwide vs Mr Worldwide Bombing Campaign
4 Likes
Changed thread title back to something not trollish…
See now supporting the sauds in any way is the kind of sexism which should be pointed out.
Not to mention our supporting of their war crimes which i guess we get to keep doing.
2 Likes
Some incredible posting recently, both good and bad. Solid start to the new year boys and girls 
3 Likes
which problem is bigger in this thread? that Yellen has spoken to GS and Google, or that she accepted too much money for it?
personally i don’t see anything wrong with former and future appointments to go talk to the industry, preferably more publicly. it certainly within the range of how someone with regulatory ideas would go around advocating those ideas to those who will be regulated.
i suppose pocketing $7m for it would be eyebrow raising me, although honestly if they pay taxes on it, not route it to shell companies, and submit records to conflict of interest watchdogs, i feel the anger is probably misplaced. i have no idea how lavishly yellen lives, but my understanding she’s not corrupt like devos/mnuchin/koch.
i have no idea how much he made in last two years, but Kasparov also does a lot speaking tours at Google etc. is it ok that he’s using his former celebrity in this way to push for democracy reforms and foreign policy perspectives? how is he different from clinton/yellen?
Yellen just has some killer anecdotes guys. You’d pay $7,000,000 too if you’d heard the one about the shark, the pan pipes and the custard pies.
8 Likes
no
are you gunning for obtuse post of the year? the difference is that pitbull doesn’t have the ability to craft government policy.