All errors should be reported to

Sunday, November 20, 2016

Norway cuts donations to Clinton Foundation by 87%

Elections have consequences.

"In 2014 the whole increased to 129 million, and last year gave Norway record $174 million. This year cut the support with over four-fifths. Next year it is only allocated 23 million dollars, a decline of 87 percent since the scant top year," read the headline in Aftenposten, a Norwegian publication.

It's just a coincidence, Aftenposten reported.

From Aftenposten:
Norway has been one of the countries that have given the most to the Clinton Foundation, but countries such as Saudi Arabia have been an even bigger contributor.
Earlier in the year claimed Stephen Gillers, law professor at New York University and one of America's leading experts in the field of legal ethics, that Norway this way tried to buy political influence.
The Norwegian and other large donor support will be seen as a measure to buy influence. It has nothing to do with whether it buying influence was the subject. What I'm worried about here is people's perception that the US Governments ' decision can be made in Norway's favor, because of Norway's generosity, said Gillers told Aftenposten.
He got the support of Craig Holman, Public Citizen Foundation that drives campaigns for increased transparency of financial bonds in American politics.
"It this case is really all about, is foreign Governments buying access to and maybe get benefits from a former foreign minister and a likely future president," he said before Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election.
This was rejected by the FOREIGN MINISTRY.
Nothing to see.

Move along.

The Norwegian press is as trustworthy as the American press.


"Trump the Press" skewers media experts who wrongly predicted Trump would lose the Republican nomination. I use my deadliest weapon: their own words. "Trump the Press" is available as a paperback, and on Kindle.


  1. Norwegian influence?

    That would explain the compulsory serving of pickled herring for breakfast at all Democrat conventions...

  2. Norway gets its money from North Sea oil. They need Clinton to continue waging the Democrat's War On Oil.

    1. I agree with this. They invest most of their oil profits into their socialist pension plans. Doing damage to fracking as Clinton hinted she would do would have been very helpful to Norway. Krugman's surprise Nobel also may have been related to this since he advocated a weak dollar and zero interest rates. As president,Clinton would have been able to play one part of the oil industry against the other, accumulating Croesian wealth.

  3. Quislings of a feather flock together. Until they don't.

  4. Well, Don, they DID print this. Better than ours, anyway, and they infer that buying influence could have been an understandable conclusion.

  5. The Norwegians must be dumber than dirt, then, for not cutting them 100%.

  6. "Buying influence" is another way of saying the US Government was for sale.

  7. You know these times they are a changin' when even the Norwegians begin to wise up.