It's being downvoted because talking about the Clinton administration's financial backing in this thread is off-topic and a little absurd, and this comment is seen as an extension of the first.

Is it really absurd?

"Clinton Foundation took at least $1,250,000 from Qatar and its World Cup committee implicated in FIFA bribery scandal"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3099839/Clinton-Foun...

But talking about an investigation into FIFA is somehow on-topic and relevant to HackerNews?!

> But talking about an investigation into FIFA is somehow on-topic and relevant to HackerNews?!

To the extent that the FIFA discussion is inappropriate for HN, the correct response is to flag the article, not post things off-topic to the article in the thread.

Whether the FIFA-related article is appropriate to HN is completely irrelevant, in any case, to discussion of whether the attack on Clinton is itself on-topic to the thread discussing the FIFA article.

Oh, hello? Could everybody who downvoted please upvote? Thank you.

"Clinton Foundation took at least $1,250,000 from Qatar and its World Cup committee implicated in FIFA bribery scandal

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3099839/Clinton-Foun... Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3099839/Clinton-Foun...

That's not what your comment was about :)

Your comment is completely off-topic and irrelevant. It's not like the US can only investigate one crime at a time.

"Clinton Foundation took at least $1,250,000 from Qatar and its World Cup committee implicated in FIFA bribery scandal"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3099839/Clinton-Foun...