What A Joke: Clinton Begs For Money From Twitter Users
As if this woman could embarrass herself anymore. In the midst of giving a masterclass about how to be a massive loser, Hillary Clin ton reached out to her naive followers on Twitter, beginning for their money.
“If you’re able to give, I hope you’ll consider supporting the life-changing work of the @ClintonFdn,” tweeted the failed 2016 Democratic Party presidential nominee. She retweeted a social media message from her eponymous foundation that read:
Thanks for being part of our community in 2021. Together, we’re working to:
- Confront the climate crisis
- Improve public health
- Expand economic opportunity
- Inspire citizen engagement & service
Join us and the Clinton family will triple your impact
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) December 29, 2021
The Clinton Foundation appears in dire need of funds, as donations dried up following Hillary Clinton’s loss to President Donald Trump in 2016. As The Daily Wire’s Ben Zeisloft reported:
"According to the group’s most recent financial report, contributions fell from $29.6 million in 2019 to $16.3 million in 2020 — a 45% decline amid COVID-19 and the lockdown-induced recession. In 2016, when former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ran for President, the group raised $62.9 million, indicating an overall 74% donation decline in a four-year period."
The foundation’s 2020 haul represents a 93% drop in overall donations to the Clinton Foundation from its high of $249 million in 2009, when President Barack Obama named Hillary Clinton as secretary of State.
Of course, Killery was ripped apart by users. Most slamming her for her husband ties to the late Jeffery Epstein, a known sex trafficker. Another user asked, "Will it benefit the families impacted by Benghazi?"
Sadly, there will be people who give to Clintons money-grabbing scheme without realizing that both creepy Bill and ole Hills have a net worth of a few hundred million between them. The Clinton's still remain the financial bankroller of the DNC, which (I am sure) is who she's panhandling for.
This brings me back to my old argument about Twitter allowing some politicians to use their platform as a soapbox and fundraiser while censoring others. This should disqualify them from the same protections of a normal private business. Am I wrong?