Old news Dave. The article is also clear that approval for the deal involved more than just Clinton/State Department approval and that there is no evidence to show quid pro quo.

But nonetheless I agree it "looks" dirty. Frankly, It seems to me as another example of buying political favor, albeit here the contributors took a more round about approach, but if money is speech, it doesn't really matter what side of your mouth you talk from.

For your review:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/putins-party/article/2003473

Last edited by nca225; 07/26/16 02:51 PM.
Forum: a medium of discussion/expression of ideas. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/forum