Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2016 19:22:30 GMT -6
Did either of you read the article
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 10, 2016 21:35:41 GMT -6
Good grief mik. It's his foundation. He probably signs the checks.
I can't believe you find this to be such a big deal when you don't seem to care how crooked someone else's foundation is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2016 21:46:09 GMT -6
Read the article. It shows the tax returns and trails. If you give me $100 to give to charity and I pretend it's my money and I'm being generous, guess what. You may not like that. I'm diminishing your contribution. I didn't do shit. You did. But I'm taking all the credit and making sure everyone knows it. That's the definition of BS.
If that's cool with you. đ I expect more from people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2016 21:47:05 GMT -6
If it's so crooked why wasn't she charged? Trump may still be charged. For trump u.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 10, 2016 23:19:43 GMT -6
Ok mik, just for you, I just finished reading the entire hit piece.
First off you have to learn how to read past the reporter's bias. I am not going to take the time to dispute the author in each and every fact, because I'm sure he did his homework and they are true, but they are presented in such a way that disparages Trump. Here is what I took away from the article.
1. Donald Trump set up the foundation to donate the Uge earnings from has massively successful book, The Art of the Deal.
2. He started that foundation with that money. If you watch shows on PBS they are always funded by dead people's foundations. I think Trump wanted to live on in a foundation after he was gone.
3. After the book money ran out The foundation tried to continue to run, and Trump kicked in a couple of times to keep the lights on. Then they started becoming successful at doing fund raisers. Note on the chart, how much more money came in from donors.
4. Trump is the head of the foundation, and probably makes many of the decisions about where the money will be donated. In his mind, it is the foundation he created, and the money raised by his creation, he can say he is donating the money. The check will tell the recipient where the money is coming from.
5. If a charity owns works of art, or any other asset, they are free to display it anywhere they want. If the Trump Foundation decided to loan the helmet to the home of Donald Trump, that does not mean that Donald owns it. It is an asset of the foundation
6. The foundation has a CPA firm taking care of the finances. They are bound, by a huge bond, and by the law, to keep things on the up and up. "No comment" is what any company would expect their CPA to say about anything.
From the information in this article, it does seem that the Trump Foundation maybe needs better management though. After they missed a few payments and there were a couple of other mistakes in past 29 years.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 11, 2016 0:07:35 GMT -6
If it's so crooked why wasn't she charged? Trump may still be charged. For trump u. mik, that is the whole thing. Why hasn't she been charged? I am sure you saw the press conference with the head of the FBI. He starts off with a long list of crimes, and then ends it with 'no intent'. No intent. What was the reason she went to all of the trouble to NOT use a .gov email address? To only carry one device? Come on mik, you are smarter than that. She wanted total control over her correspondence regardless of the law. Now we have some of the emails, she tried to hide, that are coming out about favors granted to Clinton Foundation donors. There are still some 30,000 emails that were shredded using BleachBit, and apparently they are gone forever. You have to wonder why, what are they trying to hide. Why hasn't she been charged? That is a really good question. I can only guess that the democrat establishment, the same ones that picked her over Bernie Sanders, and that runs the Justice Department, they decided to have her as their candidate instead, because they thought she could easily win, and they want keep their jobs.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 11, 2016 16:21:00 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2016 16:44:46 GMT -6
You don't live up here. It's been hot and humid as shit. Last night a woman at a restaurant dining outside was taken away by ambulance. Scary stuff
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 11, 2016 16:49:20 GMT -6
You don't live up here. It's been hot and humid as shit. Last night a woman at a restaurant dining outside was taken away by ambulance. Scary stuff That article says it was in the lower 80's. Anyway, they have released a statement saying she has pneumonia. Hmmm, that would explain the coughing fit she had the other day. But she has been coughing all year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2016 17:17:28 GMT -6
80 at 90-100% humidity up here sucks. I can't blame her.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 11, 2016 17:19:51 GMT -6
It appears that Hiliary was out cold when they piled her into the van. Why wasn't she taken to a hospital? I mean if it was any other 68 year old woman that had fallen unconscious, they would have called paramedics, and carted her away in an ambulance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2016 17:40:39 GMT -6
I heard helped into the van. I highly doubt that she was totally unconscious or unresponsive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2016 17:41:32 GMT -6
She was conscious. She was standing admittedly with support. I've been worse off drunk before.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2016 17:50:29 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 11, 2016 18:11:24 GMT -6
I heard helped into the van. I highly doubt that she was totally unconscious or unresponsive. Check the video again, she is dragging her feet just like in the cartoon above. She is not that drunk.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2016 18:16:02 GMT -6
I have foot drag from a neurological disorder. What's your point. Unless you evaluated her. It's speculation and hyperbole
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 11, 2016 21:27:03 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 12, 2016 14:21:57 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 13, 2016 16:28:49 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2016 21:52:42 GMT -6
I heard trump tried to fart and shit his pants. đ©đł
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2016 4:51:23 GMT -6
I'd say punching an old lady is pretty deplorable. I think even Ray and Cap would agree with that. Unless you can make an argument for a pro old lady punching America. Arrest warrant issued in assault of 69-year old woman protester at N.C. Trump rally - The Washington Post apple.news/A0vs0AtMbT-aWSvNPpwWsVQ
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Sept 14, 2016 8:14:56 GMT -6
I'd say punching an old lady is pretty deplorable. I think even Ray and Cap would agree with that. Unless you can make an argument for a pro old lady punching America. Hey! I feel cheated. I was promised a video that showed a guy ALLEGEDLY (the operative word here) punching an old lady, and all I end up with is a video of an old lady on the ground surrounded by hyperventilating left-wing kooks. Who produced this video? The Palestinians who blow up their own kids with rockets and then try to blame Israelis for it? I want my money back! . o O (Hmmm, now that I think about it, Hillary was always pretty chummy with Palestinian terrorists. A connection, maybe? Alleged?)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2016 16:09:13 GMT -6
Arrest warrants issued. It must be a hoax.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 15, 2016 16:46:39 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2016 18:33:50 GMT -6
If I had to choose I'd rather be charged less than 100 then have trump not pay me for my contracting services
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2016 18:45:38 GMT -6
Trump jr. Making holocaust jokes today. Nice to see him keeping it classy.
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 16, 2016 19:02:43 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by chrunch on Sept 16, 2016 20:53:16 GMT -6
In 2014, the Clinton Foundation raised $172.6 million, and spent $91.3 million. That is, according to their 2014 tax returns(pdf). Wow, that is a lot of money to spend on charity work. Kudos for that, but let's see how they spent it. $50.4 million was marked as âother expensesâ Hmm, that's more then half. Well, they have lots of employees and overhead. Surely most of that money went to pay the staff. $34.8 million spent on salaries, compensation and employee benefits. Oh, so the $50 million didn't include salaries. $5.2 million of that $91.3 million, went to charitable grants. -Wait, wut! 5.7%? I thought 10% was the legal limit. Maybe that is a year over year average. Anyway I doubt the foundation broke any laws. They are way too smart for that. So of the $91.3 million spent by the Clinton Foundation, I wonder how much of that was "other peoples money"? I wonder how those donors feel about so little of their money actually making it to charitable causes? I'm going to go out on a limb here and say, I doubt any of the big donors care where the money went. They weren't giving to the poor, they were buying influence. Shown on the 10th page of PDF above, the foundation spent $20.3 million of the $50.4 million that was marked as âother expensesâ , for travel, conferences, conventions, and meetings. That is how the Clinton's finance their king like lifestyle. Private jets and Presidential suites cost a lot of money. Well, a lot of other people's money. My inspiration for this post.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 22:03:59 GMT -6
Like Susan g komen who takes in 405 million and puts out 295 million? Ohhh spooky it must be a conspiracy. Or board members lining their pockets. I wonder which one? ? đźđź
|
|
|
Post by Raymond306 on Sept 17, 2016 10:06:37 GMT -6
My sources for statistical information on the Susan G. Komen for the Cure showed that (at least in 2009-10) the foundation spent less than 22% of their budget for administrative and fund raising expenses. Of course, my source, Wikipedia is a left-wing organization so I suppose they could be lying about that, as such organizations tend to do.
I'd be curious what your source of information was, Mikey. Or maybe you were talking about some other group connected to that foundation and, no-doubt, heavily supported by Democrats like Planned Parenthood is.
|
|