Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-19-2016, 08:47 PM
 
416 posts, read 260,628 times
Reputation: 423

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZLiam View Post
I didn't ask about Trump, nor do I care. The point I am trying to make is if the the Clintons are bringing in that much money (and $153 million combined from speaking fees since 2001) in order to "pay their bills", why in the hell would they need a salary from the Clinton Foundation?
They don't need a salary from their Foundation...nor do that take one. They donate a part of their income to it. So rather than demonizing them for the good they do, you should be applauding them.

One would think you would care about trump's foundation, given you seem so worried about the Clinton's. And you do know how much other politicians make from speaking engagements, do you have a concern about them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-19-2016, 09:18 PM
 
Location: Surprise, AZ
8,638 posts, read 10,167,253 times
Reputation: 8010
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Gordon View Post
They don't need a salary from their Foundation...nor do that take one. They donate a part of their income to it. So rather than demonizing them for the good they do, you should be applauding them.

One would think you would care about trump's foundation, given you seem so worried about the Clinton's. And you do know how much other politicians make from speaking engagements, do you have a concern about them?
I'm not sure why you are being so testy as it appears I hit a nerve. Apparently you are incapable of reading. I believe I stated already that I am well aware of the fact that they do not need nor do they take a salary considering they've made hundreds of millions since 2001 from speaking engagements alone. Furthermore, I could give two sh**s about the Clintons as I find them to be untrustworthy (for a long time). Just because someone donates $1 or $1 million doesn't make them honest, good individuals who should be applauded.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2016, 10:21 PM
 
27,682 posts, read 16,166,190 times
Reputation: 19112
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Gordon View Post
When she becomes president, in less than 6 months btw, they most assuredly don't want to have a look of impropriety. It's just the right thing to do; and to shut up the whiners, lord knows there's enough of them on the right.

The good news is there's more than enough money for the Clinton Foundation to carry on the remarkable work they are doing helping people across the world. Nice.
"pinky promise not to take anymore foreign bribes if I become potus" because SOS brib..er I mean donations don't have a look of impropriety.. "Remarkable"work there WG
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2016, 10:22 PM
 
416 posts, read 260,628 times
Reputation: 423
Testy? I've been nothing but pleasant. I find threads like these interesting and always want to find ways to add to the discussion. There's two sides to every story and we obviously see them differently.

How about those speaking fees for Palin, bother you at all?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2016, 10:36 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,169,371 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Gordon View Post
They don't need a salary from their Foundation...nor do that take one. They donate a part of their income to it. So rather than demonizing them for the good they do, you should be applauding them.

One would think you would care about trump's foundation, given you seem so worried about the Clinton's. And you do know how much other politicians make from speaking engagements, do you have a concern about them?
They get a tax write off from it, and then they get things like their travel expenses paid, (pre tax).

The whole foundation is nothing more than an estate that can be passed onto Chelsea tax free.. while they collect hundreds of millions of dollars from others and pay out a very small percentage of it to actual "charity"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2016, 10:37 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,169,371 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by saltine View Post
"pinky promise not to take anymore foreign bribes if I become potus" because SOS brib..er I mean donations don't have a look of impropriety.. "Remarkable"work there WG
yeah, they've already showed us that they lie about donations, when she said it wouldnt mix charity work, with her position as Secretary of State..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2016, 10:38 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,169,371 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Gordon View Post
Testy? I've been nothing but pleasant. I find threads like these interesting and always want to find ways to add to the discussion. There's two sides to every story and we obviously see them differently.

How about those speaking fees for Palin, bother you at all?
Palin doesnt run around selling connections to the federal government and other entities by collecting hundreds of millions in fees, claiming its a "non profit" while pocketing hundreds of millions in the bank.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2016, 05:28 AM
 
9,617 posts, read 6,072,706 times
Reputation: 3884
Excellent point. 53% of Clinton Crime Syndicate Foundation came from foreign governments and corporations. Of course, we all know the Clinton marriage is a sham; just another fraud.

Still...Why wait to restrict contributions? Vote buying? Vote for me and I'll be a good girl.

Quote:
The foundation’s announcement drew skepticism Friday from the right and the left as critics wondered why the Clintons have never before cut off corporate and overseas money to their charity — and why they would wait until after the election to do so.

The restrictions would be more stringent than those put in place while Clinton was secretary of state, when the foundation was merely required to seek State Department approval to accept new donations from foreign governments — permitting the charity to accept millions of dollars from governments and wealthy interests all over the world. They would also be stricter than the policy adopted when Clinton launched her campaign that placed some limits on foreign government funding but allowed corporate and individual donations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Palin doesnt run around selling connections to the federal government and other entities by collecting hundreds of millions in fees, claiming its a "non profit" while pocketing hundreds of millions in the bank.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...homepage/story
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2016, 12:15 PM
 
9,617 posts, read 6,072,706 times
Reputation: 3884
Isn't that interesting? No snarky answers from the left, when the question...Why wait until after the election to restrict contributions? Vote buying?

Vote for me and I'll be a good girl. Pffft!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2016, 07:58 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,444 posts, read 7,026,167 times
Reputation: 4601
Default NYT: donations to Clinton Foundation "bedevil" campaign....

noted right-wing website the New York Times raising questions about donations to the Clinton Foundation:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us...rity.html?_r=0


"The Clinton Foundation has accepted tens of millions of dollars from countries that the State Department — before, during and after Mrs. Clinton’s time as secretary — criticized for their records on sex discrimination and other human-rights issues. The countries include Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Brunei and Algeria.

Saudi Arabia has been a particularly generous benefactor. The kingdom gave between $10 million and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation. (Donations are typically reported in broad ranges, not specific amounts.) At least $1 million more was donated by Friends of Saudi Arabia, which was co-founded by a Saudi prince."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top