Kevyn

Once again you are filling the chat room with abject bullshit 89% of Clinton foundation money goes to charitable work, here is a link explaining how your bald faced lie was put together. When you need to resort to obvious lies to support your ideology don't you think it is time to examine it asking yourself why it can't stand on its own merits?
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/

Glaucon

Only one of the responses was rude, hostile and was obviously from a mentally unbalanced nitwit.

buffalo Loc: Texas

Come on, idiot. I mean really? This is just a play on semantics. "To bolster its case, CARLY for America noted that the Clinton Foundation spent 12 percent of its revenue on travel and conferences and 20 percent of its revenue on salaries. That’s true. But the Form 990 specifically breaks out those travel, conference and salary expenses that are used for “program service expenses” versus those that are used for management or fundraising purposes.
For example, nearly 77 percent of the $8.4 million spent on travel in 2013 went toward program services; 3.4 percent went to “management and general expenses”; and about 20 percent went to fundraising." Really? Just what the fuck do you think "program sevices expense" are?

Even using the broadest definition of “program expenses” possible, however, the 88 percent claim is still false. How do we know? Because the IRS 990 forms submitted by the Clinton Foundation include a specific and detailed accounting of these programmatic expenses. And even using extremely broad definitions–definitions that allow office supply, rent, travel, and IT costs to be counted as programmatic costs–the Clinton Foundation fails its own test.

If you take a narrower, and more realistic, view of the tax-exempt group’s expenditures by excluding obvious overhead expenses and focusing on direct grants to charities and governments, the numbers look much worse. In 2013, for example, only 10 percent of the Clinton Foundation’s expenditures were for direct charitable grants. The amount it spent on charitable grants–$8.8 million–was dwarfed by the $17.2 million it cumulatively spent on travel, rent, and office supplies. Between 2011 and 2013, the organization spent only 9.9 percent of the $252 million it collected on direct charitable grants.

But why should I expect a bitch clinton worshipper to see through their deception with the blind devotion you have to the criminals?

The two largest items on its list of charitable expenditures are support for the Clinton Presidential Library and paying for the Clinton Global Initiative.

The Library is, like those edifices built to house the papers and glorify the memory of other presidents, a not-altogether-worthless endeavor. But it is a monument to the vanity and the legacy of the Clintons, not the sort of “good work” helping the impoverished of the Third World, as well as the women and the girls, Hillary Clinton is always telling us she’s out to save. It may be a non-profit institution but it is not a charity.

The Clinton Global Initiative is also not a charity. According to the New York Times, it’s a “glitzy annual gathering of chief executives, heads of state and celebrities.” Those who attend it may do charitable work. But their main purpose in attending is to see and be seen talking about being charitable. The same can be said of the event itself.

Keep in mind here that we’re only talking about the actual activities of the foundation. If Hillary was trading influence with donors, that’s a separate question entirely. But as far as the organization itself goes, are the Clintons doing anything with their foundation cash which is punishable by law? As Joyner concludes, probably not. But does that mean that they are some cornucopia of good will helping the needy masses? Sure… if the needy in question are named Clinton.

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/05/05/the-clinton-foundation-isnt-a-charity-in-any-normal-sense-of-the-word/

IDIOT!!!

reconreb Loc: America / Inglis Fla.

Well said , I'll go get the muck shovel and clean up the mess formaly known as Glaucon,, AKA "Succubus"

Ricko Loc: Florida

Glaucon-according to Trump, he borrowed one million from his dad to start his own business primarily in real estate. Conversely, the Clintons became wealthy by giving speeches to Wall Street banks and foreign governments at up to 500K per. Trump has a record of successes while his primary opponent has a record of mostly failures. At least, she could not come up with a single significant accomplishment beneficial to the USA when asked. So, who has the best chance of turning this country around ? A professional politician who has fed at the public trough most of her adult life or a successful businessman ? I opt for the latter. Good Luck America !!!

buffalo Loc: Texas

Ricko Loc: Florida

Slatten49-you are correct. However, Perot was never serious candidate and used a lame excuse to get out of the race. Don't believe he ever wanted the job. I believe Trump is sincere in his desire to help turn the country around. He sure as heck does not need the job and does not need to prove anything to anyone. I do not think we can afford four more years of Obama. Good Luck America !!!

Glaucon

RESPONSE: The Republicans and its OTHER propagandas outlets are apparently keeping this quiet in case we discover the fact that this gossip is not based on even a shred of CREDIBLE EVIDECE to support these true believers factoids. Look at the source you believe is evidence rather than idle gossip and pretend you are looking me in the eyes and tell me you are this naïve. This site is a very bad joke: http://hotair.com/archives/2015/05/05/the-clinton-foundation-isnt-a-charity-in-any-normal-sense-of-the-word/

buffalo Loc: Texas

In typical moonbat fashion attack the sources. The source I used said the same thing as YOUR joke of a source only it interpreted the information realistically instead of the generalizing to make some vague term "program services expenses" mean something it is clearly not. At least to the objective observer, but you do not have the ability to see the clintons as the greedy, lying, criminal pieces of shit they are. You have been brainwashed like a member of a religious cult. Clinton worship. You need deprogramming.

All this aside, it appears that bitch clinton acted improperly in her role as SoS.

The deal appeared to collide with the State Department’s documented concerns about the repressive policies of the Saudi royal family.

But now, in late 2011, Hillary Clinton’s State Department was formally clearing the sale, asserting that it was in the national interest. At press conferences in Washington to announce the department’s approval, an assistant secretary of state, Andrew Shapiro, declared that the deal had been “a top priority” for Clinton personally. Shapiro, a longtime aide to Clinton since her Senate days, added that the “U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army have excellent relationships in Saudi Arabia.”

These were not the only relationships bridging leaders of the two nations. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contributed at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, the philanthropic enterprise she has overseen with her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Just two months before the deal was finalized, Boeing -- the defense contractor that manufactures one of the fighter jets the Saudis were especially keen to acquire, the F-15 -- contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to a company press release.

The Saudi deal was one of dozens of arms sales approved by Hillary Clinton’s State Department that placed weapons in the hands of governments that had also donated money to the Clinton family philanthropic empire, an International Business Times investigation has found.

The Clinton Foundation has not released an exact timetable (how convenient) of its donations, making it impossible to know whether money from foreign governments and defense contractors came into the organization before or after Hillary Clinton approved weapons deals that involved their interests. But news reports document that at least seven foreign governments that received State Department clearance for American arms did donate to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was serving as secretary: Algeria, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Thailand, Norway and Australia.

http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187

Coming next will be moonbat gluacoma's attack of my source.

Glaucon

I am guessing that you are just joking and you don't really believe that shit. choosing a CEO for our country who has no experience in government and public service is like hiring the butcher at Safeway to do brain surgery. We need to make some serious changes in our country and we are considering blowing it up by choosing a con artist, bull shitter. Do you actually believe promise to build a wall, deport all illegals, and prevent Muslims from coming into this country? I have an orange grove at the south pole that I can let you have really cheap, but you have to buy it today because a wealthy old couple from Tulsa is anxious to buy it tomorrow.

"Hillary has had mostly failures"? You are relying on gossip and there is no EVIDENCE of the "mostly failures" and much evidence of successes. You just don't seem to be able to get your "thinking " out of low gear.

Ricko Loc: Florida

Kevyn-the pie chart presented by buffalo would seem more accurate than the article by Farely. He would have us believe that all expenses incurred by the foundation in 2013 amounted to only 26 million. Mr. Farely may well have his numbers reversed. If you subtract 196.6 in expenses from the 222.6 million taken in the result is 26.6 million (11%) to charity which basically coincides with the pie chart. Farely, a former St. Petersburg Times reporter (liberal newspaper), lists 196.6 mil to programs and then goes on to say that this means charity. If the money went to charity why did he not say that instead of using the term "programs"? It appears he was trying to confuse the reader into accepting his findings or he does not know what he is talking about. His findings and the pie chart are diametrically opposed and both cannot be correct. If you think that 11% of the total is enough to pay all expenses so be it. To me, the pie chart makes more sense. Good Luck America !!!

Glaucon

You just seem to manufacture factoids that are not related to any evidence.

Sarah Palin' twice knocked up and never married daughter is giving speeches on not having sex before marriage, at $35,000 a throw. That is like you giving speeches on critical thinking and charging for them.

You are able to see what you want to see and to disregard that which you don't want to see. You have to be cognitively blind to no be able to come up with many things Hillary has accomplished.

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

True enough, since Perot won only 8% of the popular vote in 1996, and right at 19% in 1992.

CowboyMilt

Mostly Failures? I say so & if her mouth is moving she is probably lying...or "trying" to tell the truth...We got no more choices....TRUMP 2016 & 2020 MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN....THE DEMS HAVE HAD 8 YEARS, AGAIN, & WE ARE IN THE TOILET...TIME FOR TRUMP TO TAKE OVER & FOR HILLARY TO GO TO JAIL OR WHEREVER!

Ricko Loc: Florida

Glaucon-once again you bloviate. Trump will build the wall, he will enforce immigration laws which means deporting many, he will ban Muslims which we are unable to properly vette from coming in, and restore our economy. The requirement for one having government experience is another joke. Professional politicians are to blame for the mess we are in so we need one of them to clean things up? Lets hire the fox to ensure the safety of the hens ? The establishments on both sides of the aisle represents decades upon decades of government experience so why are we not prospering ? Why do we continually get the short end of the stick ? Why do we get involved in one sided deals with countries who hate out guts ? Why does the taxpayer of this country have to pay a disproportionate share of the costs of the UN and NATO ? Why is our National Debt increasing at such a rapid rate ? The obvious reasons are that nobody in government is adept at deal making beneficial to the USA Nor do they know anything about watching the bottom line. Hillary has fed at the government trough for most of her adult life and knows nothing else. Her goal is to keep the gravy train rolling for herself and Bill. Her programs=destroy the coal industry, higher taxes, more regulations, more freebies for many, higher energy costs due to that ominous man made global warming, and a continuation of the failed Obama foreign policy endeavors. Some have said that California is the Largest Insane Asylum in the world and I am beginning to think they might be correct. Good Luck America !!!