Hillary Hates Taxes and other Hillaryous things

[Lou]

On August 24, 2016 at 10:40 AM, red321 said:

What exactly is your issue with the Clinton Foundation Geoff and Adam?

But hey...maybe we'll all get lucky and the foundation can get shuttered...sure, hundreds of thousands of lives will be negatively impacted but...?????...victory!

 

if I may . . . 

"In case anyone actually believes that money donated by these media organisation to the Clinton Foundation goes to helping people, think again...)

Between 2009 and 2012, the Clinton Foundation raised over $500 million dollars according to a review of IRS documents by The Federalist (2012, 2011, 2010,2009, 2008). A measly 15 percent of that, or $75 million, went towards programmatic grants. More than $25 million went to fund travel expenses. Nearly $110 million went toward employee salaries and benefits. And a whopping $290 million during that period — nearly 60 percent of all money raised — was classified merely as “other expenses.” …The Clinton Foundation may well be saving lives, but it seems odd that the costs of so many life-saving activities would be classified by the organization itself as just random, miscellaneous expenses. 

I think the problem stems from the fact that you actually think the Clintons are good, caring, altruistic people. They're not. They are liars. Even under oath. They are corrupt and vindictive. They operate as if the rules don't apply to them. If it wasn't for the the shitload of money that gets funneled through the foundation that lines their pockets, Bill would be spending that time at the Fayetteville Hooters. 

 

Oh, wait...it's probably all the criticism they are receiving from other charitable groups and those that monitor them?How does the philanthropic world see the Clinton Foundation?

They're held in high esteem. There are watchdog groups that judge charities on how they're run, how transparent they are and how much they spend on programs -- some charities raise a ton of money, but spend a large percentage on salaries and bonuses instead of their actual cause.

Charity Watch gave the Clinton Foundation an A grade, while GuideStar gave it a platinum rating.

lol @ the Clintons having anything to do with transparency

 

"For a while, another group called Charity Navigator had the Clinton Foundation on a watch list because of media reports about possible conflicts of interest. It didn't judge the merit of the reports but wanted to flag for donors that others were raising questions."

 

Charity Navigator, which rates nonprofits, recently refused to rate the Clinton Foundation because its “atypical business model . . . doesn’t meet our criteria.”

Charity Navigator put the foundation on its “watch list,” which warns potential donors about investing in problematic charities. The 23 charities on the list include the Rev. Al Sharpton’s troubled National Action Network, which is cited for failing to pay payroll taxes for several years.

Other nonprofit experts are asking hard questions about the Clinton Foundation’s tax filings in the wake of recent reports that the Clintons traded influence for donations.

“IT SEEMS LIKE THE CLINTON FOUNDATION OPERATES AS A SLUSH FUND FOR THE CLINTONS,” SAID BILL ALLISON, A SENIOR FELLOW AT THE SUNLIGHT FOUNDATION, A GOVERNMENT WATCHDOG GROUP WHERE PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT AND FORDHAM LAW PROFESSOR ZEPHYR TEACHOUT WAS ONCE AN ORGANIZING DIRECTOR.

 

i'm guessing it was more than merely media reports about possible conflicts of interest. As for Charity Watch's (AIP) rating of the CF,  their process is flawed (as are all the services). 

Just two of the reviews of CW: 

Commentary: Charity Watch says, "The nonprofit sector has little oversight and much room for financial manipulation." We say: Charity Watch has no oversight and misleadingly manipulates nonprofit financial data. And: it's going to cost more to raise fundraising dollars for new and controversial causes . . . perhaps inadvertently, Charity Watch favors conventional organizations with good accountants.

and,

Unfortunately, this “gotcha” mentality and lack of transparency are AIP’s biggest shortcomings. A donor sees the score, but only limited explanation, and this approach can cause more harm than good. Ultimately, our analysis led us to the conclusion that none of the three agencies provides sufficient input into donor decision making as a stand-alone source.

 

[Tank]

3 hours ago, Lou said:

I think the problem stems from the fact that you actually think the Clintons are good, caring, altruistic people. They're not. They are liars. Even under oath. They are corrupt and vindictive. They operate as if the rules don't apply to them. If it wasn't for the the shitload of money that gets funneled through the foundation that lines their pockets, Bill would be spending that time at the Fayetteville Hooters. 

standing ovation, Lou.

[nate]

@Lou what are your sources? Fortune paints a different picture.  http://fortune.com/2016/08/27/clinton-foundation-health-work/

 

also @Lou since you love doing this.  Do you think that Trump is not a liar, corrupt, or vindictive?  If not for his fathers fortune that he inherited and squandered multiple times, and all the people he defrauded, he would probably be in an insane asylum.

 

[mtangelsfan]

Are you really trying to say the Clintons are not corrupt?

 

[Blarg]

Nate is such a Clintoris. 

[Lou]

4 hours ago, nate said:

@Lou what are your sources? Fortune paints a different picture.  http://fortune.com/2016/08/27/clinton-foundation-health-work/

 

also @Lou since you love doing this.  Do you think that Trump is not a liar, corrupt, or vindictive?  If not for his fathers fortune that he inherited and squandered multiple times, and all the people he defrauded, he would probably be in an insane asylum.

 

No, I think Trump is a liar, corrupt AND vindictive.  Unlike certain people on the left here, I have absolutely no problem saying so. 

Do you think the Clintons are liars, corrupt  and vindictive? 

[arch stanton]

We tried to come up with a list of candidates that the Republicans could nominate and that Hillary would still probably beat. We came up with Donald Trump, David Duke, and Charles Manson. Then we were stumped.

[Thomas]

10 hours ago, Lou said:

No, I think Trump is a liar, corrupt AND vindictive.  Unlike certain people on the left here, I have absolutely no problem saying so. 

Do you think the Clintons are liars, corrupt  and vindictive? 

Perhaps it'd be quicker to list the politicians who aren't liars, corrupt, and/or vindictive?

[Tank]

[Blarg]

I think Stalin would have been more appropriate than Ding Dong Jung. 

[Jason]

On 8/29/2016 at 9:32 PM, Blarg said:

Nate is such a Clintoris. 

May I have permission to use this word with some of my idiot friends?

[Blarg]

Absolutely. 

[mtangelsfan]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/a-record-number-of-americans-now-dislike-hillary-clinton/ar-AAiitFU?li=BBnbcA1

Clearly red and nate have some work to do.

 

[Glen]

56 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/a-record-number-of-americans-now-dislike-hillary-clinton/ar-AAiitFU?li=BBnbcA1

Clearly red and nate have some work to do.

 

It will be amazing if Hillary manages to blow this election.  It's looking more possible by the day.

[nate]

On 8/29/2016 at 10:21 PM, mtangelsfan said:

Are you really trying to say the Clintons are not corrupt?

 

I never said that.  I pointed out that what Lou posted about the charity was unfounded.

I absolutely think they are corrupt

[mtangelsfan]

4 hours ago, Glen said:

It will be amazing if Hillary manages to blow this election.  It's looking more possible by the day.

if she does it will likely be one of the few things she's ever blown.

[Glen]

I purposely set that one up on a tee, wondering who would take it.

[mtangelsfan]

I only drove that about 200 yards.

[Tank]

16 hours ago, Blarg said:

I think Stalin would have been more appropriate than Ding Dong Jung. 

stalin wasn't as much of a fashion stud when the cameras were around, but your point is not lost.

[mtangelsfan]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/medea-benjamin/hillary-clinton-the-podes_b_11779826.html

she is so dirty.  maybe the dirtiest ever.  I cannot believe that there is a single person who actually wants her to be president.  (taking Trump out of the equation)

[Spirit]

3 hours ago, mtangelsfan said:

I only drove that about 200 yards.

 

Bill said that about Monica. 

 

 

[gotbeer]

 

37 minutes ago, Geoff said:

 

Bill said that about Monica. 

 

 

 

except change yards to pounds.

[Jason]

7 hours ago, mtangelsfan said:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/medea-benjamin/hillary-clinton-the-podes_b_11779826.html

she is so dirty.  maybe the dirtiest ever.  I cannot believe that there is a single person who actually wants her to be president.  (taking Trump out of the equation)

Democrat until the day they die

[arch stanton]

You saw how the primaries went. There's really not that many people who want her to be president. The Republican voters backed them into a corner by choosing a babbling idiot.

[Glen]

I haven't seen it on anywhere but the mouth-breathing conservative websites yet (i.e. Breitbart, Ben Carson, etc.) but apparently the FBI is saying Clinton lost cell phones with classified emails on them.  

Sweet Jesus on a bicycle.  Once again, if I did shit like that I'd at the very least lose my clearance, and would quite possibly face charges.