Sock puppet boy gets his strings yanked

Commodity Marketing

Tools

Sock puppet boy gets his strings yanked

Dec 21, 2017 | 19:01 31
Quote Originally Posted by furrowtickler View Post
Is Aga sham or whatever it’s called, tied in with Middle East oil companies?
That would be icing on the cake .
The Aga Khan's connections are widespread and shadowy, so who knows?

There have been huge amounts of money laundered through the foundation as well, not surprising, since it handles hundreds of millions of dollars yearly. Some "couriers" have been caught carrying a million or more in cash in shopping bags or envelopes stashed in vehicles caught at border crossings.

Such is the dear family friend of our Dear Leader. Reply With Quote
Dec 21, 2017 | 21:13 32 It was released today that John Kerry just happened to be on the island at the same time as sockboy. Sounds like a meeting of globalists wonder if soros was there too. Reply With Quote
fjlip's Avatar Dec 21, 2017 | 21:15 33
Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
This is an obvious case of conflict of interests. The problem is there are no penalties at the federal level for breaking conflict of interest rules. At every level of government we are seeing this problem. The solution is for citizens to demand tougher penalties. Don't expect politicians in power of any stripe to impose sanctions on themselves.
So at least agree with the rest of us that Trudo is the WORST PM ever, a liar and a cheat that should get booted the hell out of parliament! Reply With Quote
Dec 21, 2017 | 23:20 34 Just a friendly reminder that the same scenario may be at work in your municipal governments.

It may come as a surprise that the Sask ombudsperson has received in excess of 1000 complaints since their jurisdiction was expanded into rural and urban affairs.

And I'm encouraged to note that in the last day or so another file has moved to the assistant ombudsman level.


Thats apparently where the background information has been gathered and the review of the evidence stage is about to proceed.

For all the world to see when the results are published.

But these processes still sorely miss the appropriate punishments, apologies contrition and repayment for any transgressions. Taxpayers shouldn't have to accept the guilty ones deciding what their sanctions (if any) should be. Reply With Quote
Dec 22, 2017 | 00:41 35
Quote Originally Posted by burnt View Post
The Aga Khan's connections are widespread and shadowy, so who knows?

There have been huge amounts of money laundered through the foundation as well, not surprising, since it handles hundreds of millions of dollars yearly. Some "couriers" have been caught carrying a million or more in cash in shopping bags or envelopes stashed in vehicles caught at border crossings.

Such is the dear family friend of our Dear Leader.
Are we going to be more outraged after we find out where the $25,000,000 in taxpayer funds Sock Boy donated to the Clinton Foundation actually ended up?? Reply With Quote
farmaholic's Avatar Dec 22, 2017 | 06:17 36 I wonder if these guys are as generous with their own private money as they are with everyone(taxpayer's) else's? Reply With Quote
Dec 22, 2017 | 09:16 37 They're not!
Many studies have been done on the differences between donations from the left and right leaning people. Avg left leaning people donate less, and carry no guilt in doing so,,,because they feel the government and it's agencies should be doing the looking after. They feel the government knows best.
Right leaning people donate more because they don't trust the government to look after people properly and don't trust the government to steer their donation to the areas they feel they want their money supporting. They give more in donations, because they doubt the government support what they want supported. Reply With Quote
Dec 22, 2017 | 12:34 38
Quote Originally Posted by danny W1M View Post
They're not!
Many studies have been done on the differences between donations from the left and right leaning people. Avg left leaning people donate less, and carry no guilt in doing so,,,because they feel the government and it's agencies should be doing the looking after. They feel the government knows best.
Right leaning people donate more because they don't trust the government to look after people properly and don't trust the government to steer their donation to the areas they feel they want their money supporting. They give more in donations, because they doubt the government support what they want supported.
Sure. True enough but the point here is bigger powers at play with bigger cheque books. This isn’t the united way or Salvation Army. It’s easy to get mired in conspiracy theories here cause so many hypotheticals are plausible. No different than arms dealers supplying both sides of a conflict, govts and power players play both sides of a situation intentionally or unintentionally by donating to organizations with good apparent intentions but dubious actions. There is no concrete way to police them as they are international in nature. Reply With Quote