AP Discovers a Lot of Clinton Foundation Donars Got Special Favors

[ninja007]

The OP is lying about what the AP story suggests. There is not one shred of proof that a specific favor was granted.

You can toss around words like "access", but you can't name one specific thing this so called access produced.

The Clinton Foundation is a global philanthropy organization that has nearly the same list of donors as the Gates Foundation.

The OP doesn't know anything about the foundation; he is just taking potshots. Read some of his other posts. He is a troll spammer hoping to sway low information morons.

only 6% of the funds raised went to charity you fucking lib shill.

 

[Dragonlady]

AP Discovers a Lot of Clinton Foundation Donars Got Special Favors

over 1/2

REALLY???? - You know they've had to retract that story as both false and misleading?

The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad

Here's another one:

Experts: New Clinton State Dept. emails show donor ‘access,’ not ‘favors’

and another:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/u...inton-presidential-campaign-charity.html?_r=0

Terrified to answer why not one US charity recieves that kind of money from foreign governments.

Name one other US Charity that does the kind of work the Clinton Foundation does in Africa - there are none. These governments are giving money to the Clintons because they have been so effective at delivering the charity to its intended recipients. So much of the foreign aid and charity that goes to Africa ends up on the black market, or sold by the governments to line their pockets of the dictator or his military staff. The Clintons have partnered both with governments and NGO's to effectively deliver medicines to the areas they're needed most.

Recent bans to female genital mutilation in Kenya show that progress is being made in regards to many of the gender related issues the Clintons are working on. Overcoming thousands of years of culture and tradition doesn't happen overnight.

 

[idb]

What gives?
I thought the lame stream media were all Hillary shills?

 

[320 Years of History]

I truly think all the Clinton Foundation recriminations exist and are even possible to make for the following reasons:

• Most people are not senior executives and have no clue of what a senior executive does, what their work days are like or anything else about how they live, other than that outwardly senior execs and principals appear to live "the live of Riley."
• Senior executives and principals are not about to publicly discuss what their work days and lives are like, other than perhaps to talk about interesting places, interesting people/conversations, hobbies, vacations or their kids or some other "polite" topic that somehow intersects with their work lives.

For all the Clinton Foundation hoopla, people are forgetting (or don't know) one thing:

People don't set up 501(c) foundations, which is what the Clinton Foundation is, to collect/make money; they set them up to give it away!!! ​

Can the creator of a 501(c) earn something from the Foundation? Yes, they can if the foundation pays them a salary. They can if the foundation buys their founder's goods and services. The Clinton's don't have any goods, and their only service offerings are honoraria and government service. Do you really think the Clinton Foundation is going to engage the Clintons to give a speech to the Clinton Foundation?

There's plenty of sensationalism about the Clinton Foundation and the people who met with Mrs. Clinton.

• Meetings:
  Out of curiosity, what the heck do you think a Secretary of State or any other senior executive mostly does? Well, I'll tell you: mostly, they go from one meeting to the next. In between "big" meetings, they read stuff to get prepared for the next meeting, they sign documents that lower level staff prepared as a consequence of prior meetings, they talk to folks on the phone to get details about a meeting that already took place or that will take place.
• Money:
  What money? Who gets rich saying, "Give money to this charity that does nothing for and buys nothing from me or my friends, and maybe I'll talk to you."?

In alleged the Clinton Foundation "pay to play" scheme, what personal financial gain did Hillary or Bill Clinton get?

• 2010 Clinton Foundation Tax Return
  • Page 7: Compensation of Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, Highest Compensated Employees, and Independent Contractors
    • No Clinton received compensation of any sort.
• 2012 Clinton Foundation Tax Return
  • Page 7: Compensation of Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, Highest Compensated Employees, and Independent Contractors
    • Chelsea Clinton and Terry McAuliffe are both listed. How much did they receive? $0.00.

Looking at the (as known) process of donations to the Clinton Foundation (CF) and meeting requests with HRC, the process would look as follows:

1. Donor gives "big money" to CF
2. CF spends money on needy people and various good/service providers
   • Was HRC one of those recipients of money? No.
   • The donor clearly wasn't.
3. Donor requests meeting with Hillary Clinton (HRC)
   • Meeting does not occur --> End.
   • Meeting occurs --> Go to #4.
4. Donor and HRC meet.
5. Donor ask for "something" from HRC/SecState, which by inference means U.S.
   • Donor receives what was requested --> Go to #6
   • Donor does not receive what was requested.--> Go to #6
6. Increase in HRC personal fortune?
   • Yes --> deposit is recorded and investigated
   • No --> nothing happens
7. End

So, somebody please show me some tangible proof that Hillary Clinton personally benefitted from anything having to do with the Clinton Foundation's fundraising. You wrote that -- "for personal gain" -- not I; it's your premise.

Seeing as Mrs. Clinton wasn't paid anything by the CF, that's not where she'd have gotten a personal financial gain. The next place to look is to see what outcomes took place subsequent to the meeting. I looked into one such donor, the first one noted in the AP's article. In other words, just what did the Clintons receive in exchange for all these donations and meetings? The CF is not like Trump Organization, which is a business. It's a charity, just like the Shawn Carter Foundation.

What does the AP article say? (I have time right now to address only the first person noted.)

Donors who were granted time with Clinton included:An internationally known economist who asked for her help as the Bangladesh government pressured him to resign from a nonprofit bank he ran.

• Bangladesh's GDP is $150B. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet could together buy and sell the whole damn country. I realize that to most Americans, the idea that a private individual can have meaningful enough influence in a country like Bangladesh is absurd. Well, it's not, not by a longshot. In countries that have only very wealthy and very poor citizens, the wealthy folks there, be they part of the government or not, have tremendous say in the governance of the place. If they have a role in government or an arm of it, they have even more.
  
  The man who for some reason went unnamed in the AP's article is Muhammad Yunus. What help did he get from Mrs. Clinton? Apparently not enough...He was forced to step down from his position on the board at the Bangladeshi nonprofit organization involved.
  
  What organization? Grameen Bank, which is a Nobel Peace Prize-winning microfinance organization and community development bank founded in Bangladesh. It makes small loans (known as microcredit or "grameencredit") to the impoverished without requiring collateral. The name Grameen is derived from the word gram which means "rural" or "village" in the Bengali Language.
  
  Now what do "Mr. and Mrs. Typical American" know about Bangladesh or the Grameen Bank? I suspect nothing for I doubt that most Americans even know where Bangladesh is, much less the name of its domestic development bank (it's essentially their version of the Small Business Administration); however, there's quite a lot to know about the bank and its role in Bangladesh governance.
  
  The first thing to know is that in countries as small and poor as Bangladesh, a single very wealthy (for that country) individual usually has a huge influence on the functioning and stability of the country. Here you'll find why Mr. Yunus and Mrs. Clinton had a U.S. government related reason to interact.
  
  There's more to Mr. Yunus and the bank than just that, however. I'll leave it to you to peruse the following and lean a bit on your own.

• Grameen Bank: Taking Capitalism to the Poor
• Yunus seeks people’s support for smooth transition of leadership in Grameen Bank
• Will the Government of Bangladesh Ruin Grameen Bank? | Grameen Foundation | Connecting the World's Poor to Their Potential

What is the value of the Grameen Bank? In addition to what you'll have found if you read the content at the links I provided, it, under Mr. Yunus, has pioneered a new approach to making the benefits of capitalism available to poor folks and has played a central role in bringing more wealth to the poorest people there.. Do you suppose there's a reason for Mrs. Clinton to want to understand?

More directly related to her role at State, are you aware of how ISIS preys on poor nations and inserts itself? Do you know where Bangladesh may fit in ISIS' designs? If ISIS were to have its way, Bangladesh could easily become a place where ISIS inserts itself. What about Myanmar right next door to Bangladesh?​

So, while it may massage one's feelings of disdain toward Mrs. Clinton for what her relationships looked like superficially, exercise just a little bit of intellectual integrity and at least look further than just what you see published in a newspaper article. Mrs. Clinton is quite like many senior execs in that she acts to do the right thing first and worries about optics later. That's hurting her right now given the acrimony over the CF. But if you read the content I've linked in this post, you'll find that at least one of the associations noted in the AP article the thread OP references is not one whereof there existed some untoward goings on.

Exactly, not that the conservatives here care or will even bother to read it. They think they've got something on the Clintons this time. And they'd be wrong.

Hell, I doubt most folks here have watches the video in the AP article referenced in the OP. In it, Mr. Braun states, "Her political opponents have tried to suggest, as her rival Donald Trump says, this looks like 'pay to play.' We haven't seen any clear evidence that it was 'pay to play' despite all the email and other materials we examined."

That leaves the "access" element. In consideration of access having been granted as a consequence of someone's donation to the Clinton Foundation, I'd ask the folks who take exception with the idea or act of people having obtained access to the SecState the questions below:

• What does one think any modestly large political donation is? Want some access to GOP policy makers? Become a "Republican Eagle." They don't even pretend that access isn't what the donations/membership is about. It's the first listed benefit of being a "Republican Eagle."
• Does a donation even need to be political, or monetary for that matter, in order to produce access to another individual?
  • Have you ever done something for someone whom you know has some ability to benefit you?
    • Maybe you offered to look after your boss' pets while s/he went on vacation. Do you think you couldn't ask your boss to speak with your kid or cousin or "whomever" to discuss "something?" Of course you could. Your boss would be happy to do that in exchange for the kindness you showed by taking good care of his/her pets so they didn't have to be boarded at a kennel.
    • Let's say that an associate gave you something -- money, a recommendation for a job, or an in-kind act of decency. If you had a social event, would you invite them as a courtesy and in consideration of their having before done you a "solid?"
  • If you are part of the night cleaning crew and you go into a VP's office and overhear them talking on the phone about a fallen tree in his yard and you speak up to offer the services of your spouse's landscaping business to get the tree removed, do you honestly think when your son is close to graduating from school (college or high school), do you really think that VP would not at least make sure your kid gets an interview at the company? Of course he would.

Now, if one wants to complain about the price of access to various individuals, that's reasonable, but it's also a different matter. It's a matter not of who donates the "kindness" or does the "solid," but rather of the nature and extent of the good deed that must be done to get the access. So what is there to say about that? Well, okay, I'll say it: the price of access to Hillary Clinton is high. Be that as it may, anyone naive enough to think that access is not going to be granted in exchange for a good deed, one is minimally being thoroughly unreasonable and, carrying it to the farthest extreme, hypocritical.

 

[Lakhota]

Sounds like AP speaks with forked tongue.

AP Witch-Hunt On Hillary?

 

[sonic]

The OP is lying about what the AP story suggests. There is not one shred of proof that a specific favor was granted.

You can toss around words like "access", but you can't name one specific thing this so called access produced.

The Clinton Foundation is a global philanthropy organization that has nearly the same list of donors as the Gates Foundation.

The OP doesn't know anything about the foundation; he is just taking potshots. Read some of his other posts. He is a troll spammer hoping to sway low information morons.

only 6% of the funds raised went to charity you fucking lib shill.

Absolute total bullshit. That crap has been floated by ignoramuses like you for far too long. All the amazing things they've done on only 6%? Are you fucking brain dead?
The foundation has made amazing progress around the globe and has been praised by people all across the political and ideological spectrum. They use employees rather than contractors, which adds considerable costs, and the ridiculous bullshit you're spewing doesn't take that and many other charity specific expenses into account. Some asshole cherry picked a few numbers out of the financials and tried to sell this 6% crap to gullible partisans like you, and of course you bought it without bothering to use the brain God gave you to question it. No surprise there.

 

[320 Years of History]

I truly think all the Clinton Foundation recriminations exist and are even possible to make for the following reasons:

• Most people are not senior executives and have no clue of what a senior executive does, what their work days are like or anything else about how they live, other than that outwardly senior execs and principals appear to live "the live of Riley."
• Senior executives and principals are not about to publicly discuss what their work days and lives are like, other than perhaps to talk about interesting places, interesting people/conversations, hobbies, vacations or their kids or some other "polite" topic that somehow intersects with their work lives.

For all the Clinton Foundation hoopla, people are forgetting (or don't know) one thing:

People don't set up 501(c) foundations, which is what the Clinton Foundation is, to collect/make money; they set them up to give it away!!! ​

Can the creator of a 501(c) earn something from the Foundation? Yes, they can if the foundation pays them a salary. They can if the foundation buys their founder's goods and services. The Clinton's don't have any goods, and their only service offerings are honoraria and government service. Do you really think the Clinton Foundation is going to engage the Clintons to give a speech to the Clinton Foundation?

There's plenty of sensationalism about the Clinton Foundation and the people who met with Mrs. Clinton.

• Meetings:
  Out of curiosity, what the heck do you think a Secretary of State or any other senior executive mostly does? Well, I'll tell you: mostly, they go from one meeting to the next. In between "big" meetings, they read stuff to get prepared for the next meeting, they sign documents that lower level staff prepared as a consequence of prior meetings, they talk to folks on the phone to get details about a meeting that already took place or that will take place.
• Money:
  What money? Who gets rich saying, "Give money to this charity that does nothing for and buys nothing from me or my friends, and maybe I'll talk to you."?

In alleged the Clinton Foundation "pay to play" scheme, what personal financial gain did Hillary or Bill Clinton get?

• 2010 Clinton Foundation Tax Return
  • Page 7: Compensation of Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, Highest Compensated Employees, and Independent Contractors
    • No Clinton received compensation of any sort.
• 2012 Clinton Foundation Tax Return
  • Page 7: Compensation of Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, Highest Compensated Employees, and Independent Contractors
    • Chelsea Clinton and Terry McAuliffe are both listed. How much did they receive? $0.00.

Looking at the (as known) process of donations to the Clinton Foundation (CF) and meeting requests with HRC, the process would look as follows:

1. Donor gives "big money" to CF
2. CF spends money on needy people and various good/service providers
   • Was HRC one of those recipients of money? No.
   • The donor clearly wasn't.
3. Donor requests meeting with Hillary Clinton (HRC)
   • Meeting does not occur --> End.
   • Meeting occurs --> Go to #4.
4. Donor and HRC meet.
5. Donor ask for "something" from HRC/SecState, which by inference means U.S.
   • Donor receives what was requested --> Go to #6
   • Donor does not receive what was requested.--> Go to #6
6. Increase in HRC personal fortune?
   • Yes --> deposit is recorded and investigated
   • No --> nothing happens
7. End

So, somebody please show me some tangible proof that Hillary Clinton personally benefitted from anything having to do with the Clinton Foundation's fundraising. In other words, just what did the Clintons receive in exchange for all these donations and meetings? The CF is not like Trump Organization, which is a business. It's a charity, just like the Shawn Carter Foundation.

Seeing as Mrs. Clinton wasn't paid anything by the CF, that's not where she'd have gotten a personal financial gain. The next place to look is to see what outcomes took place subsequent to the meeting. I looked into one such donor, the first one noted in the AP's article.

What does the AP article say? (I have time right now to address only the first person noted.)

Donors who were granted time with Clinton included:An internationally known economist who asked for her help as the Bangladesh government pressured him to resign from a nonprofit bank he ran.

• Bangladesh's GDP is $150B. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet could together buy and sell the whole damn country. I realize that to most Americans, the idea that a private individual can have meaningful enough influence in a country like Bangladesh is absurd. Well, it's not, not by a longshot. In countries that have only very wealthy and very poor citizens, the wealthy folks there, be they part of the government or not, have tremendous say in the governance of the place. If they have a role in government or an arm of it, they have even more.
  
  The man who for some reason went unnamed in the AP's article is Muhammad Yunus. What help did he get from Mrs. Clinton? Apparently not enough...He was forced to step down from his position on the board at the Bangladeshi nonprofit organization involved.
  
  What organization? Grameen Bank, which is a Nobel Peace Prize-winning microfinance organization and community development bank founded in Bangladesh. It makes small loans (known as microcredit or "grameencredit") to the impoverished without requiring collateral. The name Grameen is derived from the word gram which means "rural" or "village" in the Bengali Language.
  
  Now what do "Mr. and Mrs. Typical American" know about Bangladesh or the Grameen Bank? I suspect nothing for I doubt that most Americans even know where Bangladesh is, much less the name of its domestic development bank (it's essentially their version of the Small Business Administration); however, there's quite a lot to know about the bank and its role in Bangladesh governance.
  
  The first thing to know is that in countries as small and poor as Bangladesh, a single very wealthy (for that country) individual usually has a huge influence on the functioning and stability of the country. Here you'll find why Mr. Yunus and Mrs. Clinton had a U.S. government related reason to interact.
  
  There's more to Mr. Yunus and the bank than just that, however. I'll leave it to you to peruse the following and lean a bit on your own.

• Grameen Bank: Taking Capitalism to the Poor
• Yunus seeks people’s support for smooth transition of leadership in Grameen Bank
• Will the Government of Bangladesh Ruin Grameen Bank? | Grameen Foundation | Connecting the World's Poor to Their Potential

What is the value of the Grameen Bank? In addition to what you'll have found if you read the content at the links I provided, it, under Mr. Yunus, has pioneered a new approach to making the benefits of capitalism available to poor folks and has played a central role in bringing more wealth to the poorest people there.. Do you suppose there's a reason for Mrs. Clinton to want to understand?

More directly related to her role at State, are you aware of how ISIS preys on poor nations and inserts itself? Do you know where Bangladesh may fit in ISIS' designs? If ISIS were to have its way, Bangladesh could easily become a place where ISIS inserts itself. What about Myanmar right next door to Bangladesh?​

So, while it may massage one's feelings of disdain toward Mrs. Clinton for what her relationships looked like superficially, exercise just a little bit of intellectual integrity and at least look further than just what you see published in a newspaper article. Mrs. Clinton is quite like many senior execs in that she acts to do the right thing first and worries about optics later. That's hurting her right now given the acrimony over the CF. But if you read the content I've linked in this post, you'll find that at least one of the associations noted in the AP article the thread OP references is not one whereof there existed some untoward goings on.

Name one other US charity that foreign governments give tens of millions of dollars to. Just one.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck......

Bush Foundations Accepted Unlimited Secret Donations from Foreign Countries

I win.

and I bet a hell of alot more than 6% went to charity, unlike the clintons. And she did it through the state dept. Pay to play. Why so many deleted emails and lies? Why did Chelsea have an alias? This is crazy.

Red and Blue:
Maybe it did, maybe it didn't. I don't know. I haven't looked at the Bush Foundation financial statements.

Do you know who/what is/are the beneficiaries of the Bush Foundation? The Bush Presidential Library. Not starving people. Not dying people. Not hungry people. Not children. Not sick people. Not jobless people. Not homeless people.

Blue:
Where is this 6% coming from? The Clinton Foundation's 2014 financial statements are here for all to see. Looking at the Foundation's 2014 expenditures that were made:

• 57% went to the Health Access Initiative, which is a charitable endeavor
• 20%+ went to perform other charitable deeds, not including the Clinton Presidential library.

And please don't just start typing and expect that I'm going to accept what you say. Just as I did, provide some credible source links that back up your assertions.

 

[Care4all]

The OP is lying about what the AP story suggests. There is not one shred of proof that a specific favor was granted.

You can toss around words like "access", but you can't name one specific thing this so called access produced.

The Clinton Foundation is a global philanthropy organization that has nearly the same list of donors as the Gates Foundation.

The OP doesn't know anything about the foundation; he is just taking potshots. Read some of his other posts. He is a troll spammer hoping to sway low information morons.

only 6% of the funds raised went to charity you fucking lib shill.

NOPE! you are the one that is totally misinformed on this Ninja!
Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch

88.3% of donations go to charity programs, 12% is for overhead, the Clinton Foundation has an ''A'' rating as a charity.

 

[Clementine]

Well, it's what you do in a Banana Republic.

News from The Associated Press

It is obvious that Hillary has been engaging in Pay-to-Play bribery schemes from the time she was appoint Secretary of State.

Many donors to Clinton Foundation met with her at State
More than half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money — either personally or through companies or groups — to the Clinton Foundation. It's an extraordinary proportion indicating her possible ethics challenges if elected president.

I think she took the position for what it would do for her and the Foundation. It was never about serving this country. She is nothing but a self-serving, power hungry bitch and would sell out anyone if she and her cronies could make a buck. Look what her and Bill did to the poor people of Haiti after the earthquake. It was just another money-making opportunity for her and those who donated to the Clinton Foundation. The foundation does little to help anyone and is nothing but a slush fund.

It's scary to think she could have a chance to use the power of the presidency to further her own interests.

 

[jon_berzerk]

AP Discovers a Lot of Clinton Foundation Donars Got Special Favors

over 1/2

REALLY???? - You know they've had to retract that story as both false and misleading?

The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad

Here's another one:

Experts: New Clinton State Dept. emails show donor ‘access,’ not ‘favors’

and another:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/u...inton-presidential-campaign-charity.html?_r=0

in reality it is probably more then half

she is a sleaze bag

 

[jon_berzerk]

AP Discovers a Lot of Clinton Foundation Donars Got Special Favors

over 1/2

REALLY???? - You know they've had to retract that story as both false and misleading?

The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad

Here's another one:

Experts: New Clinton State Dept. emails show donor ‘access,’ not ‘favors’

and another:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/u...inton-presidential-campaign-charity.html?_r=0

Terrified to answer why not one US charity receives that kind of money from foreign governments.

yes really amazing coincidence --LOL

 

[bripat9643]

AP Discovers a Lot of Clinton Foundation Donars Got Special Favors

over 1/2

REALLY???? - You know they've had to retract that story as both false and misleading?

The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad

Here's another one:

Experts: New Clinton State Dept. emails show donor ‘access,’ not ‘favors’

and another:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/u...inton-presidential-campaign-charity.html?_r=0

VOX?
USAToday?
NYT?

They're all in the tank for Hillary.

 

[bripat9643]

AP Discovers a Lot of Clinton Foundation Donars Got Special Favors

over 1/2

REALLY???? - You know they've had to retract that story as both false and misleading?

The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad

Here's another one:

Experts: New Clinton State Dept. emails show donor ‘access,’ not ‘favors’

and another:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/u...inton-presidential-campaign-charity.html?_r=0

Terrified to answer why not one US charity recieves that kind of money from foreign governments.

Name one other US Charity that does the kind of work the Clinton Foundation does in Africa - there are none. These governments are giving money to the Clintons because they have been so effective at delivering the charity to its intended recipients. So much of the foreign aid and charity that goes to Africa ends up on the black market, or sold by the governments to line their pockets of the dictator or his military staff. The Clintons have partnered both with governments and NGO's to effectively deliver medicines to the areas they're needed most.

Recent bans to female genital mutilation in Kenya show that progress is being made in regards to many of the gender related issues the Clintons are working on. Overcoming thousands of years of culture and tradition doesn't happen overnight.

Yeah, right, because the Emir of Qatar is so well known for his charity work in Africa.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

So, this begs the following pertinent question.

IF the Clinton Foundation was indeed "Play-To-Play" as der Trumpendummy claims.

What did his One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) worth of donations buy him?.

Trump gave at least $100K to Clinton Foundation.

Why if Trumpty Dumpty has gotten his short hairs (what few he has) in a twist over the Clinton Foundation....why.....oh.....why won't he release his Taxes and let the world see what he with his money....what is he hiding?

He wants Clinton to come clean with the Foundation, he should just as willing to come clean with his taxes.

Trump isn't accused of doing anything illegal. Hillary is. That's the difference. There's nothing for Trump to "come clean" about.

What's illegal here dope?

Violating the laws for handling classified material. Taking bribes in exchange for government favors.

Both of which only exist in your head.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

How do you know there was no request for bribes?

Because there is no evidence that they did. Remember the part where the guy who wrote the book where all this innuendo about the Clinton Foundation started said he had NO EVIDENCE as to any of this happening, but the optics are certainly there? This is a rumour, bought and paid for with Republican dark money, to smear the Clintons - no more, no less.

This is no different than email, Benghazi, TravelGate, Vince Foster, stealing china from the White House. None of this happened except in the fevered minds of Republicans.

Again, name one US charity that foreign governments give that kind of money to.

There are none, because it's bribery.

It's been posted.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Well, it's what you do in a Banana Republic.

News from The Associated Press

It is obvious that Hillary has been engaging in Pay-to-Play bribery schemes from the time she was appoint Secretary of State.

Many donors to Clinton Foundation met with her at State
More than half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money — either personally or through companies or groups — to the Clinton Foundation. It's an extraordinary proportion indicating her possible ethics challenges if elected president.

I think she took the position for what it would do for her and the Foundation. It was never about serving this country. She is nothing but a self-serving, power hungry bitch and would sell out anyone if she and her cronies could make a buck. Look what her and Bill did to the poor people of Haiti after the earthquake. It was just another money-making opportunity for her and those who donated to the Clinton Foundation. The foundation does little to help anyone and is nothing but a slush fund.

It's scary to think she could have a chance to use the power of the presidency to further her own interests.

Yes, god forbid that an American politician uses their considerable power and influence for positive change in the world. That's just awful. Lock them up.

 

[320 Years of History]

The OP is lying about what the AP story suggests. There is not one shred of proof that a specific favor was granted.

You can toss around words like "access", but you can't name one specific thing this so called access produced.

The Clinton Foundation is a global philanthropy organization that has nearly the same list of donors as the Gates Foundation.

The OP doesn't know anything about the foundation; he is just taking potshots. Read some of his other posts. He is a troll spammer hoping to sway low information morons.

only 6% of the funds raised went to charity you fucking lib shill.

Absolute total bullshit. That crap has been floated by ignoramuses like you for far too long. All the amazing things they've done on only 6%? Are you fucking brain dead?
The foundation has made amazing progress around the globe and has been praised by people all across the political and ideological spectrum. They use employees rather than contractors, which adds considerable costs, and the ridiculous bullshit you're spewing doesn't take that and many other charity specific expenses into account. Some asshole cherry picked a few numbers out of the financials and tried to sell this 6% crap to gullible partisans like you, and of course you bought it without bothering to use the brain God gave you to question it. No surprise there.

"The biggest donors to [Trump's] foundation in recent years have been other people, most notably Vince and Linda McMahon, top executives at World Wrestling Entertainment. They donated $5 million after Trump made a cameo on “Wrestlemania” in 2007, according to a spokesman for WWE. The spokesman said Trump was paid separately for the appearance. [Of course that's what he said. LOL] Linda McMahon has since left WWE and is now active in politics. She and her husband both declined to comment about the donation."

The above and a ton of other Trump Foundation facts and figures are available here.


Moreover....

​

​

The page above is part of a list of ostensibly charitable contributions of some 2900 golf rounds at a Trump golf club. (The list was provided by the Trump campaign and can be found in its entirety here. This list includes 4,844 individual gifts, which add up to more than $102 million over five years.)

Give-aways to businesses and a guy named Brian classified as charitable contribution. Is there any wonder why Trump is (1) being audited and (2) doesn't want to release his tax return?

(click images above for source article)​

Above, one sees a round of golf given to Serena Williams, yes, the tennis player, and listed as charity. Ms. Williams says she received a photo and a plane ticket.

I don't know what I'm about to write to be fact, but I know it lines up just right in terms of timing...In April 2015, Ms. Williams did a paid appearance to promote the opening of the tennis center at Trump's Sterling, VA club. Her being there about a month before the event lines up quite nicely with typical event planning lead times and whatnot for her going to check out the facility, meet with the promoters to plan the event, and so on. As the talent for the event, of course Ms. Williams would receive a plane ticket.

 

[easyt65]

From today's headlines....

HILLARY ON THE DEFENSE: Claims emails linking Foundation with State Dept. 'a lot of smoke,' but 'no fire'
- http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/25/clinton-pushes-back-on-foundation-controversy-says-its-been-transparent.html


Surrogate Silence: Dem officials mum as Clinton battles foundation allegations
- http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/24/surrogate-silence-dem-officials-mum-as-clinton-battles-foundation-allegations.html


ARK DEM-GAZ WARNS NATION: Clinton Getting Away With Ethics Shorcuts For Long, Long Time...
-http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2016/aug/24/a-pattern-emerges-20160824/


'Sensitive' cable undercuts Hillary story about Russian uranium deal...
- http://circa.com/politics/election-2016/clinton-warned-in-2009-memo-that-russian-uranium-moves-were-bad-for-us-Europe


Much like a screen door on a submarine, Hillary's unethical, criminal selling of favors and access her entire career is leaking very badly....and it is so unavoidably obvious and growing that the media is having a hard time keeping it quiet.

 

[bripat9643]

So, this begs the following pertinent question.

IF the Clinton Foundation was indeed "Play-To-Play" as der Trumpendummy claims.

What did his One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) worth of donations buy him?.

Trump gave at least $100K to Clinton Foundation.

Why if Trumpty Dumpty has gotten his short hairs (what few he has) in a twist over the Clinton Foundation....why.....oh.....why won't he release his Taxes and let the world see what he with his money....what is he hiding?

He wants Clinton to come clean with the Foundation, he should just as willing to come clean with his taxes.

Trump isn't accused of doing anything illegal. Hillary is. That's the difference. There's nothing for Trump to "come clean" about.

What's illegal here dope?

Violating the laws for handling classified material. Taking bribes in exchange for government favors.

Both of which only exist in your head.

Wrong, douche bag. Taking bribes is illegal. So is keeping classified material on a private email server.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Almost 300 posts and not one special favor cited. Hmmmm....I think the OP was lying.