Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jkcerda, Apr 7, 2016.

  1. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #1
    http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foun...als-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187
    Hillary is as crooked as they come.
     
  2. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #2
  3. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #3
    We need a graphics expert to morph Hillary Clinton into Dick Cheney. Hey, there's big bucks to make in war!
     
  4. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #4
    MY CANDIDATE is Bernie so far. so try that. many don't get what "Trump 2016 .......... Burn baby Burn" means.
     
  5. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #5
    How much do I have to donate to get some SAWs, M240B's, hell I will settle for a M4 with a fun switch.
     
  6. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #6
    Yeah, but you've said that you'll support Trump if Bernie doesn't get it, which isn't very likely at this point, so you pretty much are going to support Trump according to what you've said.
     
  7. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #7
    private message on the way.
     
  8. Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #8
    Because we've NEVER sold weapons to Saudi Arabia before and we NEVER EVER would've sold them weapons if they didn't contribute to the Clinton Foundation. It simply must be a direct quid pro quo!!!!!

    Jeebus I hate this kind of simplistic, naive and stupid "reasoning."
     
  9. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #9
    please, she is the saleswoman of the year, https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...fe84ec-bc09-11e3-96ae-f2c36d2b1245_story.html
    the more war there is the better her chances of getting "donations"
     
  10. Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #10
  11. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #11
    Oh please. Donation/bribe , arm sales money.
     
  12. Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #12
    C'mon man. You clearly intended this cite to be read as applying to a Clinton Foundation donation, or at a minimum that's how your cite reads. It's grossly misleading and you know it.

    ...adding, as to the Boeing donation for Haiti earthquake relief via the CF, why I never! *falls on my fainting couch* I'm aghast at corporate America helping such a thing.
     
  13. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #13
    the donation WAS made to the Clinton foundation, I did not "intend it to read" it that way, that is HOW it was done per the article. why would money meant for the "US World's Fair pavilion" be placed into the Clinton foundations coffers?
     
  14. Robisan, Apr 7, 2016
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2016

    Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #14
    Seriously read it again. You have it wrong.

    Edit: Read the two previous paragraphs before your cite. That's "the donation" your cite is referring to.
     
  15. Meister Suspended

    Meister

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    #15
    What's with all the secrecy?

    It's no secret what "Trump 2016 ... Burn baby Burn means."

    And after the GOP has brought us the Bush dynasty, wars and the patriot act, Trump is doing mankind an unbelievable favor.


    We just have to make sure Hitlary doesn't get anywhere near the whitehouse.
     
  16. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #16
    easier if you just quote it, I keep missing it.
     
  17. Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #17
    Oh Jeebus, reading is fundamental.

    The "the donation" being referred to in the last paragraph is the donation mentioned in the first paragraph. The third paragraph does not say "to secure donations," it says "to secure the donation" - a specific reference to the previously mentioned donation.

    And because you need paint by numbers, a donation "to help resuscitate floundering U.S. efforts to host a pavilion at the upcoming World’s Fair" is not a donation to the Clinton Foundation.
     
  18. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #18
    you are smarter than that .
    2+2 =?????
    sell our planes = get donation to your foundation.
     
  19. Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #19
    Stupid or lying? I honestly don't know.

    This sentence:

    Clinton did not point out that, to secure the donation, the State Department had set aside ethics guidelines that first prohibited solicitations of Boeing and then later permitted only a $1 million gift from the company.​

    Is about the overt, publicly acknowledged solicitation of Boeing's World's Fair donation. The article states Clinton "jubilantly announced" it. In order for her to openly solicit the World's Fair donation the State Department had to set aside rules.

    There is no such public announcement of solicitation nor any set aside of State Department rules for Boeing's donation to the Haiti earthquake relief fund at the Clinton Foundation. You are either stupid or lying to say otherwise.

    ...adding, also not sure how a donation to the Haiti earthquake relief fund at the Clinton Foundation is some kind of payoff that lines Hillary's pockets.
     
  20. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #20
    dude, are you going to be like Mac & just start hurling insults?
    who manages the Clinton foundation? you don't think the Clintons get paid from there? come'on, I am not going to return your insults, but quit being so naive.
     
  21. Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #22
    That's a non-answer. The meaning of the paragraph excerpts is plainly obvious. Notwithstanding plain English language you insist it implies something it clearly does not. You offer no defense or explanation. You simply and wrongly assert and insist. What adjectives would you suggest? Until you address this forthrightly I'll stick with the one's I suggested.

    ~~~

    Yes, I'm sure Bill Clinton is paid a very handsome salary + expenses by the foundation. He gets the same amount whether or not Boeing makes its donation. So, in that sense, the Clinton's do not directly, incrementally, benefit from Boeing's donation.

    More importantly, however, is the fact that overall overhead at the CF is only about 11%. From a Factcheck summary that directly refutes of the assertions in your NY Post link:

    In order to get a fuller picture of the Clinton Foundation’s operations, (Daniel Borochoff, president and founder of CharityWatch) said, people need to look at the foundation’s consolidated audit, which includes the financial data on separate affiliates like the Clinton Health Access Initiative.

    “Otherwise,” he said, “you are looking at just a piece of the pie.”

    Considering all of the organizations affiliated with the Clinton Foundation, he said, CharityWatch concluded about 89 percent of its budget is spent on programs. That’s the amount it spent on charity in 2013, he said.

    We (Factcheck) looked at the consolidated financial statements (see page 4) and calculated that in 2013, 88.3 percent of spending was designated as going toward program services — $196.6 million out of $222.6 million in reported expenses.

    That's two sources - CharityWatch and Factcheck - supporting these numbers.

    Note that total overhead (non program) expenses in 2013 was just $26 million. According to Wikipedia the CF had 350 employees in 2013 (sourced to the NYTimes). $26mil for 350 employees + other overhead expenses + Bill Clinton's salary/expenses seems reasonable to me. The idea that the CF is just some kind of slush fund to enrich the Clintons is just nonsense.

    There, I gave you a substantive response directly to the point you raised. Why don't you try it in return instead of just asserting and insisting without substance or support.
     

Share This Page