In Defense of the Clinton Foundation

[Steve_McGarrett]

And what work would that be?
All i hear from liberals is the great work the hildabeast foundation does yet I never hear of the results.

The Facts

The Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation builds partnerships between businesses, NGOs, governments, and individuals everywhere to work faster, better, and leaner; to find solutions that last; and to transform lives and communities from what they are today to what they can be tomorrow.

Since our founding, the Foundation has focused on tackling a number of the world's greatest challenges: Global Health; Climate Change; Economic Development; Health and Wellness; and improving opportunity for Girls and Women.

Because of our work, more than 31,000 American schools are providing kids with healthy food choices in an effort to eradicate childhood obesity; more than 105,000 farmers in Malawi, Rwanda, and Tanzania are benefiting from climate-smart agronomic training, higher yields, and increased market access; more than 33,500 tons of greenhouse gas emissions are being reduced annually across the United States; over 450,000 people have been impacted through market opportunities created by social enterprises in Latin America, the Caribbean, and Asia; through the independent Clinton Health Access Initiative, over 11.5 million people in more than 70 countries have access to CHAI-negotiated prices for HIV/AIDS medications; an estimated 85 million people in the U.S. will be reached through strategic health partnerships developed across industry sectors at both the local and national level; and members of the Clinton Global Initiative community have made more than 3,500 Commitments to Action, which have improved the lives of over 430 million people in more than 180 countries.

And you give me a link to the hildabeast foundation?

If there were more emojis that showed my disdane I'd sure post em......

Why don't you try to refute the link? The clinton foundation is respected and has a solid record, with high ratings from places like charitywatch.

You've gone and went full retard....
Thats like asking John Gotti if he ran an above board business.

Notice how you fail to actually, you know, attempt to argue with the facts I've provided.

Do you deny that charities have committed criminal acts?

 

[Alexandra]

I think a principled defense of the Clinton Foundation would include information about how much of the $$$ it takes in goes to the charities it purports to exist for. Just about any charitable foundation worth its salt is not only forthcoming with such information, but earnestly provides in copious detail, because its whole reason is to provide for whatever their causes are, and they really, really, want to attract donors - and one of the best ways is to reassure potential donors that their money would go towards doing some good.

The only time anyone has heard of the Clinton Foundation doing any good is when Hillary needs a few feel-good, handkerchief cases to wheel out for the ol' campaign.

Anyone worthwhile in her position, facing he criticism she's facing, wouldn't wheel out some tear-jerking propaganda... she'd wheel out a detailed accounting of the foundation's finances that demonstrates integrity.

Not happening.

Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch

I repeat, detailed. Vet your watchdogs, Watchdogging the charity watchdogs

Has the Clinton Foundation released its detailed financials for public scrutiny?

If you don't have an allergic reaction to such things, think for yourself.

 

[David_42]

If you come into this with an open mind, you might stop spreading nonsense about the clinton foundation
In Defense of the Clinton Foundation

Business and organizations love to rub shoulders with iconic American leaders — though the money Clinton has earned is probably a fraction of what President George H.W. Bush made by signing up with The Carlyle Group, an international conglomerate that made most of its initial money from U.S. defense contracts and from foreign countries like Saudi Arabia.

Rather than simply "cashing in," the young former president wanted to devote a substantial amount of his time and energy to making the world a better place, improving the lives of poor people and, at the same time, demonstrating in a real way that Americans cared.

I know for a fact that then-President Bush was deeply appreciative of Bill Clinton's help during this period. Let’s not forget that it was George W. Bush who had so much confidence in Bill Clinton that he asked him to co-chair with his dad, Bush 41, both the Tsunami and Katrina relief efforts. (Later, Obama personally asked Bill Clinton to co-chair the Haiti relief effort.)

HERE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING PEOPLE IGNORE:

Ingeniously, Bill Clinton set up his annual foundation conclave, CGI, as a clearinghouse between other foundations, wealthy donors, NGOs, governments and businesses — to meet face-to-face with charities working on the front lines of poverty alleviation, education and healthcare.

At CGI, the Clinton Foundation doesn’t encourage donations to itself (though it easily could have), but instead seeks "commitments" from donors to other charitable organizations to improve global health and wellness, increase economic opportunities for women in less-developed nations, reduce childhood obesity, and spur economic growth in countries that desperately need the help.

After those commitments are made, no money flows into the Clinton Foundation. Donors honor their pledges directly with the charities.

Over 10 years, CGI meetings have resulted in more than 3,100 commitments to action, deploying more than $100 billion which has been used to improve the lives of more than 430 million people in 180 countries around the world.

And about those "bribes" or whatever you want to call them:

One claim is that to help a major donor to the foundation, Hillary as secretary of state, changed her position and supported the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, which was ratified in 2011.

In another instance, again to help the same donor, the U.S. government agreed to give a Russian company ownership of Uranium One, a firm which controls approximately 20 percent of the uranium mines in the U.S.

Knowing a bit how this administration works, it is preposterous to think that President Obama or his White House approved any deal to benefit the Clinton Foundation or one of its donors.

In the case of Colombia, it had made tremendous strides in improving its human rights situation during the period Hillary Clinton changed her position. And, as it turned out, the Clinton donor had sold out his stake in Uranium One years before the Russians bought the company.

Importantly, The New York Times reported that no less than nine federal agencies and officials including the Defense, Treasury and Energy Departments, as well as the White House, had to approve the Uranium One deal.

Jose Fernandez, who held the position of the department's principal representative on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which reviewed the sale, told The Wall Street Journal: "Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter."

Better not ask for an open mind, people will see how corrupt it is.

Show me some proof of this "corruption." You can't.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

And you give me a link to the hildabeast foundation?

If there were more emojis that showed my disdane I'd sure post em......

Why don't you try to refute the link? The clinton foundation is respected and has a solid record, with high ratings from places like charitywatch.

You've gone and went full retard....
Thats like asking John Gotti if he ran an above board business.

Notice how you fail to actually, you know, attempt to argue with the facts I've provided.

You're making a career out of going full retard....

There's another example of you doing it. Is this what passes as debate? I win.

You've provided so called facts from the very foundation that is being investigated by the FBI....sorry if I find your evidence lacking.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

If you come into this with an open mind, you might stop spreading nonsense about the clinton foundation
In Defense of the Clinton Foundation

Business and organizations love to rub shoulders with iconic American leaders — though the money Clinton has earned is probably a fraction of what President George H.W. Bush made by signing up with The Carlyle Group, an international conglomerate that made most of its initial money from U.S. defense contracts and from foreign countries like Saudi Arabia.

Rather than simply "cashing in," the young former president wanted to devote a substantial amount of his time and energy to making the world a better place, improving the lives of poor people and, at the same time, demonstrating in a real way that Americans cared.

I know for a fact that then-President Bush was deeply appreciative of Bill Clinton's help during this period. Let’s not forget that it was George W. Bush who had so much confidence in Bill Clinton that he asked him to co-chair with his dad, Bush 41, both the Tsunami and Katrina relief efforts. (Later, Obama personally asked Bill Clinton to co-chair the Haiti relief effort.)

HERE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING PEOPLE IGNORE:

Ingeniously, Bill Clinton set up his annual foundation conclave, CGI, as a clearinghouse between other foundations, wealthy donors, NGOs, governments and businesses — to meet face-to-face with charities working on the front lines of poverty alleviation, education and healthcare.

At CGI, the Clinton Foundation doesn’t encourage donations to itself (though it easily could have), but instead seeks "commitments" from donors to other charitable organizations to improve global health and wellness, increase economic opportunities for women in less-developed nations, reduce childhood obesity, and spur economic growth in countries that desperately need the help.

After those commitments are made, no money flows into the Clinton Foundation. Donors honor their pledges directly with the charities.

Over 10 years, CGI meetings have resulted in more than 3,100 commitments to action, deploying more than $100 billion which has been used to improve the lives of more than 430 million people in 180 countries around the world.

And about those "bribes" or whatever you want to call them:

One claim is that to help a major donor to the foundation, Hillary as secretary of state, changed her position and supported the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, which was ratified in 2011.

In another instance, again to help the same donor, the U.S. government agreed to give a Russian company ownership of Uranium One, a firm which controls approximately 20 percent of the uranium mines in the U.S.

Knowing a bit how this administration works, it is preposterous to think that President Obama or his White House approved any deal to benefit the Clinton Foundation or one of its donors.

In the case of Colombia, it had made tremendous strides in improving its human rights situation during the period Hillary Clinton changed her position. And, as it turned out, the Clinton donor had sold out his stake in Uranium One years before the Russians bought the company.

Importantly, The New York Times reported that no less than nine federal agencies and officials including the Defense, Treasury and Energy Departments, as well as the White House, had to approve the Uranium One deal.

Jose Fernandez, who held the position of the department's principal representative on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which reviewed the sale, told The Wall Street Journal: "Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter."

Better not ask for an open mind, people will see how corrupt it is.

Show me some proof of this "corruption." You can't.

Holy shit you're a moron!!!

 

[David_42]

I think a principled defense of the Clinton Foundation would include information about how much of the $$$ it takes in goes to the charities it purports to exist for. Just about any charitable foundation worth its salt is not only forthcoming with such information, but earnestly provides in copious detail, because its whole reason is to provide for whatever their causes are, and they really, really, want to attract donors - and one of the best ways is to reassure potential donors that their money would go towards doing some good.

The only time anyone has heard of the Clinton Foundation doing any good is when Hillary needs a few feel-good, handkerchief cases to wheel out for the ol' campaign.

Anyone worthwhile in her position, facing he criticism she's facing, wouldn't wheel out some tear-jerking propaganda... she'd wheel out a detailed accounting of the foundation's finances that demonstrates integrity.

Not happening.

Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch

I repeat, detailed. Vet your watchdogs, Watchdogging the charity watchdogs

Has the Clinton Foundation released its detailed financials for public scrutiny?

If you don't have an allergic reaction to such things, think for yourself.

CharityWatch’s work is supported by individual donations.

Annual Reports, Financials & Tax-Exempt Materials

 

[AntonToo]

I think a principled defense of the Clinton Foundation would include information about how much of the $$$ it takes in goes to the charities it purports to exist for.

Clinton foundation's main work is to influence people to pledge funds and efforts towards specific charity causes. That takes staff, logistics, organization. That work's charitable effect is not easily quantifiable in accounting.

For example Clinton Health Access Initiative works with governments and private groups to lower the costs of treatment for HIV/AIDS in the developing world.

On paper that is 100% money spent on expenses like staff,travel etc. and 0% on charity, while in reality lower costs of treatment is big help to those sick people.

Read up None

 

[David_42]

If you come into this with an open mind, you might stop spreading nonsense about the clinton foundation
In Defense of the Clinton Foundation

Business and organizations love to rub shoulders with iconic American leaders — though the money Clinton has earned is probably a fraction of what President George H.W. Bush made by signing up with The Carlyle Group, an international conglomerate that made most of its initial money from U.S. defense contracts and from foreign countries like Saudi Arabia.

Rather than simply "cashing in," the young former president wanted to devote a substantial amount of his time and energy to making the world a better place, improving the lives of poor people and, at the same time, demonstrating in a real way that Americans cared.

I know for a fact that then-President Bush was deeply appreciative of Bill Clinton's help during this period. Let’s not forget that it was George W. Bush who had so much confidence in Bill Clinton that he asked him to co-chair with his dad, Bush 41, both the Tsunami and Katrina relief efforts. (Later, Obama personally asked Bill Clinton to co-chair the Haiti relief effort.)

HERE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING PEOPLE IGNORE:

Ingeniously, Bill Clinton set up his annual foundation conclave, CGI, as a clearinghouse between other foundations, wealthy donors, NGOs, governments and businesses — to meet face-to-face with charities working on the front lines of poverty alleviation, education and healthcare.

At CGI, the Clinton Foundation doesn’t encourage donations to itself (though it easily could have), but instead seeks "commitments" from donors to other charitable organizations to improve global health and wellness, increase economic opportunities for women in less-developed nations, reduce childhood obesity, and spur economic growth in countries that desperately need the help.

After those commitments are made, no money flows into the Clinton Foundation. Donors honor their pledges directly with the charities.

Over 10 years, CGI meetings have resulted in more than 3,100 commitments to action, deploying more than $100 billion which has been used to improve the lives of more than 430 million people in 180 countries around the world.

And about those "bribes" or whatever you want to call them:

One claim is that to help a major donor to the foundation, Hillary as secretary of state, changed her position and supported the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, which was ratified in 2011.

In another instance, again to help the same donor, the U.S. government agreed to give a Russian company ownership of Uranium One, a firm which controls approximately 20 percent of the uranium mines in the U.S.

Knowing a bit how this administration works, it is preposterous to think that President Obama or his White House approved any deal to benefit the Clinton Foundation or one of its donors.

In the case of Colombia, it had made tremendous strides in improving its human rights situation during the period Hillary Clinton changed her position. And, as it turned out, the Clinton donor had sold out his stake in Uranium One years before the Russians bought the company.

Importantly, The New York Times reported that no less than nine federal agencies and officials including the Defense, Treasury and Energy Departments, as well as the White House, had to approve the Uranium One deal.

Jose Fernandez, who held the position of the department's principal representative on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which reviewed the sale, told The Wall Street Journal: "Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter."

Better not ask for an open mind, people will see how corrupt it is.

Show me some proof of this "corruption." You can't.

Holy shit you're a moron!!!

Third time doing it. Meanwhile, the cure for CDS is on the horizon.

 

[buckeye45_73]

If you come into this with an open mind, you might stop spreading nonsense about the clinton foundation
In Defense of the Clinton Foundation

Business and organizations love to rub shoulders with iconic American leaders — though the money Clinton has earned is probably a fraction of what President George H.W. Bush made by signing up with The Carlyle Group, an international conglomerate that made most of its initial money from U.S. defense contracts and from foreign countries like Saudi Arabia.

Rather than simply "cashing in," the young former president wanted to devote a substantial amount of his time and energy to making the world a better place, improving the lives of poor people and, at the same time, demonstrating in a real way that Americans cared.

I know for a fact that then-President Bush was deeply appreciative of Bill Clinton's help during this period. Let’s not forget that it was George W. Bush who had so much confidence in Bill Clinton that he asked him to co-chair with his dad, Bush 41, both the Tsunami and Katrina relief efforts. (Later, Obama personally asked Bill Clinton to co-chair the Haiti relief effort.)

HERE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING PEOPLE IGNORE:

Ingeniously, Bill Clinton set up his annual foundation conclave, CGI, as a clearinghouse between other foundations, wealthy donors, NGOs, governments and businesses — to meet face-to-face with charities working on the front lines of poverty alleviation, education and healthcare.

At CGI, the Clinton Foundation doesn’t encourage donations to itself (though it easily could have), but instead seeks "commitments" from donors to other charitable organizations to improve global health and wellness, increase economic opportunities for women in less-developed nations, reduce childhood obesity, and spur economic growth in countries that desperately need the help.

After those commitments are made, no money flows into the Clinton Foundation. Donors honor their pledges directly with the charities.

Over 10 years, CGI meetings have resulted in more than 3,100 commitments to action, deploying more than $100 billion which has been used to improve the lives of more than 430 million people in 180 countries around the world.

And about those "bribes" or whatever you want to call them:

One claim is that to help a major donor to the foundation, Hillary as secretary of state, changed her position and supported the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, which was ratified in 2011.

In another instance, again to help the same donor, the U.S. government agreed to give a Russian company ownership of Uranium One, a firm which controls approximately 20 percent of the uranium mines in the U.S.

Knowing a bit how this administration works, it is preposterous to think that President Obama or his White House approved any deal to benefit the Clinton Foundation or one of its donors.

In the case of Colombia, it had made tremendous strides in improving its human rights situation during the period Hillary Clinton changed her position. And, as it turned out, the Clinton donor had sold out his stake in Uranium One years before the Russians bought the company.

Importantly, The New York Times reported that no less than nine federal agencies and officials including the Defense, Treasury and Energy Departments, as well as the White House, had to approve the Uranium One deal.

Jose Fernandez, who held the position of the department's principal representative on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which reviewed the sale, told The Wall Street Journal: "Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter."

Better not ask for an open mind, people will see how corrupt it is.

Show me some proof of this "corruption." You can't.

Enojoy

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

If you come into this with an open mind, you might stop spreading nonsense about the clinton foundation
In Defense of the Clinton Foundation

Business and organizations love to rub shoulders with iconic American leaders — though the money Clinton has earned is probably a fraction of what President George H.W. Bush made by signing up with The Carlyle Group, an international conglomerate that made most of its initial money from U.S. defense contracts and from foreign countries like Saudi Arabia.

Rather than simply "cashing in," the young former president wanted to devote a substantial amount of his time and energy to making the world a better place, improving the lives of poor people and, at the same time, demonstrating in a real way that Americans cared.

I know for a fact that then-President Bush was deeply appreciative of Bill Clinton's help during this period. Let’s not forget that it was George W. Bush who had so much confidence in Bill Clinton that he asked him to co-chair with his dad, Bush 41, both the Tsunami and Katrina relief efforts. (Later, Obama personally asked Bill Clinton to co-chair the Haiti relief effort.)

HERE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING PEOPLE IGNORE:

Ingeniously, Bill Clinton set up his annual foundation conclave, CGI, as a clearinghouse between other foundations, wealthy donors, NGOs, governments and businesses — to meet face-to-face with charities working on the front lines of poverty alleviation, education and healthcare.

At CGI, the Clinton Foundation doesn’t encourage donations to itself (though it easily could have), but instead seeks "commitments" from donors to other charitable organizations to improve global health and wellness, increase economic opportunities for women in less-developed nations, reduce childhood obesity, and spur economic growth in countries that desperately need the help.

After those commitments are made, no money flows into the Clinton Foundation. Donors honor their pledges directly with the charities.

Over 10 years, CGI meetings have resulted in more than 3,100 commitments to action, deploying more than $100 billion which has been used to improve the lives of more than 430 million people in 180 countries around the world.

And about those "bribes" or whatever you want to call them:

One claim is that to help a major donor to the foundation, Hillary as secretary of state, changed her position and supported the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, which was ratified in 2011.

In another instance, again to help the same donor, the U.S. government agreed to give a Russian company ownership of Uranium One, a firm which controls approximately 20 percent of the uranium mines in the U.S.

Knowing a bit how this administration works, it is preposterous to think that President Obama or his White House approved any deal to benefit the Clinton Foundation or one of its donors.

In the case of Colombia, it had made tremendous strides in improving its human rights situation during the period Hillary Clinton changed her position. And, as it turned out, the Clinton donor had sold out his stake in Uranium One years before the Russians bought the company.

Importantly, The New York Times reported that no less than nine federal agencies and officials including the Defense, Treasury and Energy Departments, as well as the White House, had to approve the Uranium One deal.

Jose Fernandez, who held the position of the department's principal representative on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which reviewed the sale, told The Wall Street Journal: "Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter."

Better not ask for an open mind, people will see how corrupt it is.

Show me some proof of this "corruption." You can't.

Holy shit you're a moron!!!

Third time doing it. Meanwhile, the cure for CDS is on the horizon.

Clinton Dementia Syndrome?

 

[David_42]

Why don't you try to refute the link? The clinton foundation is respected and has a solid record, with high ratings from places like charitywatch.

You've gone and went full retard....
Thats like asking John Gotti if he ran an above board business.

Notice how you fail to actually, you know, attempt to argue with the facts I've provided.

You're making a career out of going full retard....

There's another example of you doing it. Is this what passes as debate? I win.

You've provided so called facts from the very foundation that is being investigated by the FBI....sorry if I find your evidence lacking.

It's a pointless investigation that will go nowhere, just like every other investigation prompted by CDS.

 

[David_42]

If you come into this with an open mind, you might stop spreading nonsense about the clinton foundation
In Defense of the Clinton Foundation


HERE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING PEOPLE IGNORE:
And about those "bribes" or whatever you want to call them:

Better not ask for an open mind, people will see how corrupt it is.

Show me some proof of this "corruption." You can't.

Holy shit you're a moron!!!

Third time doing it. Meanwhile, the cure for CDS is on the horizon.

Clinton Dementia Syndrom?

Clinton Derangement syndrome.

 

[Care4all]

I think a principled defense of the Clinton Foundation would include information about how much of the $$$ it takes in goes to the charities it purports to exist for. Just about any charitable foundation worth its salt is not only forthcoming with such information, but earnestly provides in copious detail, because its whole reason is to provide for whatever their causes are, and they really, really, want to attract donors - and one of the best ways is to reassure potential donors that their money would go towards doing some good.

The only time anyone has heard of the Clinton Foundation doing any good is when Hillary needs a few feel-good, handkerchief cases to wheel out for the ol' campaign.

Anyone worthwhile in her position, facing the criticism she's facing, wouldn't wheel out some tear-jerking propaganda... she'd wheel out a detailed accounting of the foundation's finances that demonstrates integrity.

Not happening.

Maybe you haven't looked? 88% of the money donated to the Clinton Family foundation goes to charitable programs, $2 out of every $100 donated to the foundation is spent on fund raising. "A" rating as a charity.
Charity watchdog
Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch

here is how CharityWatch.org analyze the charities

Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch

 

[Rustic]

If you come into this with an open mind, you might stop spreading nonsense about the clinton foundation
In Defense of the Clinton Foundation

Business and organizations love to rub shoulders with iconic American leaders — though the money Clinton has earned is probably a fraction of what President George H.W. Bush made by signing up with The Carlyle Group, an international conglomerate that made most of its initial money from U.S. defense contracts and from foreign countries like Saudi Arabia.

Rather than simply "cashing in," the young former president wanted to devote a substantial amount of his time and energy to making the world a better place, improving the lives of poor people and, at the same time, demonstrating in a real way that Americans cared.

I know for a fact that then-President Bush was deeply appreciative of Bill Clinton's help during this period. Let’s not forget that it was George W. Bush who had so much confidence in Bill Clinton that he asked him to co-chair with his dad, Bush 41, both the Tsunami and Katrina relief efforts. (Later, Obama personally asked Bill Clinton to co-chair the Haiti relief effort.)

HERE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING PEOPLE IGNORE:

Ingeniously, Bill Clinton set up his annual foundation conclave, CGI, as a clearinghouse between other foundations, wealthy donors, NGOs, governments and businesses — to meet face-to-face with charities working on the front lines of poverty alleviation, education and healthcare.

At CGI, the Clinton Foundation doesn’t encourage donations to itself (though it easily could have), but instead seeks "commitments" from donors to other charitable organizations to improve global health and wellness, increase economic opportunities for women in less-developed nations, reduce childhood obesity, and spur economic growth in countries that desperately need the help.

After those commitments are made, no money flows into the Clinton Foundation. Donors honor their pledges directly with the charities.

Over 10 years, CGI meetings have resulted in more than 3,100 commitments to action, deploying more than $100 billion which has been used to improve the lives of more than 430 million people in 180 countries around the world.

And about those "bribes" or whatever you want to call them:

One claim is that to help a major donor to the foundation, Hillary as secretary of state, changed her position and supported the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, which was ratified in 2011.

In another instance, again to help the same donor, the U.S. government agreed to give a Russian company ownership of Uranium One, a firm which controls approximately 20 percent of the uranium mines in the U.S.

Knowing a bit how this administration works, it is preposterous to think that President Obama or his White House approved any deal to benefit the Clinton Foundation or one of its donors.

In the case of Colombia, it had made tremendous strides in improving its human rights situation during the period Hillary Clinton changed her position. And, as it turned out, the Clinton donor had sold out his stake in Uranium One years before the Russians bought the company.

Importantly, The New York Times reported that no less than nine federal agencies and officials including the Defense, Treasury and Energy Departments, as well as the White House, had to approve the Uranium One deal.

Jose Fernandez, who held the position of the department's principal representative on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which reviewed the sale, told The Wall Street Journal: "Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter."

...and she's a loopy kunt

 

[Alexandra]

I think a principled defense of the Clinton Foundation would include information about how much of the $$$ it takes in goes to the charities it purports to exist for. Just about any charitable foundation worth its salt is not only forthcoming with such information, but earnestly provides in copious detail, because its whole reason is to provide for whatever their causes are, and they really, really, want to attract donors - and one of the best ways is to reassure potential donors that their money would go towards doing some good.

The only time anyone has heard of the Clinton Foundation doing any good is when Hillary needs a few feel-good, handkerchief cases to wheel out for the ol' campaign.

Anyone worthwhile in her position, facing he criticism she's facing, wouldn't wheel out some tear-jerking propaganda... she'd wheel out a detailed accounting of the foundation's finances that demonstrates integrity.

Not happening.

Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch

I repeat, detailed. Vet your watchdogs, Watchdogging the charity watchdogs

Has the Clinton Foundation released its detailed financials for public scrutiny?

If you don't have an allergic reaction to such things, think for yourself.

CharityWatch’s work is supported by individual donations.

Annual Reports, Financials & Tax-Exempt Materials

You don't understand the meaning of the word "detailed" very well, do you? Either that or you're just spitting out links without even reading what they have to say in a "hail mary" pass, hoping against hope no one will notice.

 

[David_42]

I think a principled defense of the Clinton Foundation would include information about how much of the $$$ it takes in goes to the charities it purports to exist for. Just about any charitable foundation worth its salt is not only forthcoming with such information, but earnestly provides in copious detail, because its whole reason is to provide for whatever their causes are, and they really, really, want to attract donors - and one of the best ways is to reassure potential donors that their money would go towards doing some good.

The only time anyone has heard of the Clinton Foundation doing any good is when Hillary needs a few feel-good, handkerchief cases to wheel out for the ol' campaign.

Anyone worthwhile in her position, facing he criticism she's facing, wouldn't wheel out some tear-jerking propaganda... she'd wheel out a detailed accounting of the foundation's finances that demonstrates integrity.

Not happening.

Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch

I repeat, detailed. Vet your watchdogs, Watchdogging the charity watchdogs

Has the Clinton Foundation released its detailed financials for public scrutiny?

If you don't have an allergic reaction to such things, think for yourself.

CharityWatch’s work is supported by individual donations.

Annual Reports, Financials & Tax-Exempt Materials

You don't understand the meaning of the word "detailed" very well, do you? Either that or you're just spitting out links without even reading what they have to say in a "hail mary" pass, hoping against hope no one will notice.

I've done my research. It doesn't get much more detailed then what I've provided straight from the source, which is already under a microscope.

 

[AntonToo]

This forum is the POLITICS forum. I addressed the politics. Don't like it? Too fucking bad

Idiot, just because something is politics...nevermind, you are too fucking dumb to waste time on.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I think a principled defense of the Clinton Foundation would include information about how much of the $$$ it takes in goes to the charities it purports to exist for. Just about any charitable foundation worth its salt is not only forthcoming with such information, but earnestly provides in copious detail, because its whole reason is to provide for whatever their causes are, and they really, really, want to attract donors - and one of the best ways is to reassure potential donors that their money would go towards doing some good.

The only time anyone has heard of the Clinton Foundation doing any good is when Hillary needs a few feel-good, handkerchief cases to wheel out for the ol' campaign.

Anyone worthwhile in her position, facing he criticism she's facing, wouldn't wheel out some tear-jerking propaganda... she'd wheel out a detailed accounting of the foundation's finances that demonstrates integrity.

Not happening.

Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch

I repeat, detailed. Vet your watchdogs, Watchdogging the charity watchdogs

Has the Clinton Foundation released its detailed financials for public scrutiny?

If you don't have an allergic reaction to such things, think for yourself.

CharityWatch’s work is supported by individual donations.

Annual Reports, Financials & Tax-Exempt Materials

You don't understand the meaning of the word "detailed" very well, do you? Either that or you're just spitting out links without even reading what they have to say in a "hail mary" pass, hoping against hope no one will notice.

I've done my research. It doesn't get much more detailed then what I've provided straight from the source, which is already under a microscope.

Yeah....excuse me if i dont believe you when the source is from the hillary crime foundation.

 

[Alexandra]

I think a principled defense of the Clinton Foundation would include information about how much of the $$$ it takes in goes to the charities it purports to exist for.

Clinton foundation's main work is to influence people to pledge funds and efforts towards specific charity causes. That takes staff, logistics, organization. That work's charitable effect is not easily quantifiable in accounting.

For example Clinton Health Access Initiative works with governments and private groups to lower the costs of treatment for HIV/AIDS in the developing world.

On paper that is 100% money spent on expenses like staff,travel etc. and 0% on charity, while in reality lower costs of treatment is big help to those sick people.

Read up None

Spoken like someone who's never really had to go to the mat for a charity. Like someone who has no clue what it takes to raise money for the truly needy. Like someone who's been trained to see it as a profession that affords the high life. Like a Clinton.

To hell with you.

 

[Alexandra]

I think a principled defense of the Clinton Foundation would include information about how much of the $$$ it takes in goes to the charities it purports to exist for. Just about any charitable foundation worth its salt is not only forthcoming with such information, but earnestly provides in copious detail, because its whole reason is to provide for whatever their causes are, and they really, really, want to attract donors - and one of the best ways is to reassure potential donors that their money would go towards doing some good.

The only time anyone has heard of the Clinton Foundation doing any good is when Hillary needs a few feel-good, handkerchief cases to wheel out for the ol' campaign.

Anyone worthwhile in her position, facing he criticism she's facing, wouldn't wheel out some tear-jerking propaganda... she'd wheel out a detailed accounting of the foundation's finances that demonstrates integrity.

Not happening.

Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch

I repeat, detailed. Vet your watchdogs, Watchdogging the charity watchdogs

Has the Clinton Foundation released its detailed financials for public scrutiny?

If you don't have an allergic reaction to such things, think for yourself.

CharityWatch’s work is supported by individual donations.

Annual Reports, Financials & Tax-Exempt Materials

You don't understand the meaning of the word "detailed" very well, do you? Either that or you're just spitting out links without even reading what they have to say in a "hail mary" pass, hoping against hope no one will notice.

I've done my research. It doesn't get much more detailed then what I've provided straight from the source, which is already under a microscope.

It can't be under a microscope, because they (Clinton Foundation) haven't provided it.