Hurricane Donation Benefited Bush Son

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by IJ Reilly, Mar 25, 2006.

  1. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #1
    More of those Bush family values...

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-donation25mar25,1,5007518.story
     
  2. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #2
    This is one of those good-and-bad deals. Yeah, no doubt about the precedent issue being bad. The good part is the publicity for the charity, and that good software is available.

    'Rat
     
  3. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #3
    how do we know it's good?
     
  4. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #4
    I've served on the board of several non-profit charitable organizations. No way do any of them accept a restricted donation that amounts to a pass-through to anyone, let alone, a family member of the donor. The IRS should look into this, as it appears to be an effort to disguise a gift to a family member as a charitable donation. Were I a member of an organization that did agree to such an arrangement, I'd certainly be tempted to ask the board of directors how they justified it within their fiduciary responsibilities.
     
  5. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #5
    mrs bush has succeeded in getting some press for neil's software company. until this story broke, i wasn't aware of what he was doing these days.

    i suspect part of the plan was also to, after getting the computers in the schools, use that as a basis for further sales.

    this stinks all over the place.
     
  6. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #6
    I'm also hearing that Mrs. Bush will not only get a tax donation for that donation to a family member's pet charity, she will also reap rewards as a shareholder in the company.

    But hey, Greenpeace was just audited, as were some left-leaning religious groups, basically on heresay evidence, so with standards like that you'd think an investigation into this charity would be no problem. :rolleyes:
     
  7. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #7
    In another article on this story, I read that Neil Bush has previously made a "charitable" donation that ended up coming full circle back to his company. I'll try to find a link.
     
  8. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #8
    With damning evidence in plain sight, is much of an investigation necessary?

    At this point, all an official would need to do issue a few subpoenas so as to dot his Ts and cross his Is.
     
  9. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #9
    Here it is:

    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/3742329.html
     
  10. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #10
    Ah but first they would have to get permission from Dear Leader or one of his appointed lackeys (and by lackey I mean not only a lickspittle, but someone who is 'lackey' in independence from the administration of Dear Leader.) Preferable one who does 'a heck of a job'.
     
  11. XNine macrumors 68040

    XNine

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Location:
    Why are you wearing that stupid man suit?
    #11
    I wonder what kind of subliminal messages this guy puts in his software?

    "ALL YOUR BASE BELONGS TO BUSH!"
     
  12. tristan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Location:
    high-rise in beautiful bethesda
    #12
    This sounds like tax evasion and earnings manipulation, actually. Why didn't the software vendor just donate the software? Because this way:

    1. Barbara Bush gets to take a deduction
    2. The software company gets to book the revenue (from the "sale")
    3. The software company pays taxes on the profit (but I bet they don't have any profits)
    4. The software company looks like its more valuable (higher earnings + higher profits = valuation and IPO/stock price)

    I don't know if this is legal or not - it probably is, but it shouldn't be. At they very least, the software company should disclose to investors that some of their revenues and profits actually come from a donation from somebody's freakin' mom.

    Actually, i'm starting to think it's definitely not legal. This is a loophole that any wealthy person who owns a connected business could drive a truck through.
     
  13. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #13
    How d'you think they could afford the truck in the first place?
     
  14. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #14
    It could be software that only a mother could love.

    Isn't this the same Bush brother that was part of the savings & loan scandal?
     

Share This Page