Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 14 Aug '16 20:56 / 1 edit
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LYRUOd_QoM

    This is a good documentary in regards to what goes on in the Clinton Foundation. It is an hour long, but well worth the watch.
  2. 14 Aug '16 20:59
    For those that don't like YouTube, here is the skinny.

    Only about 10% of the money goes to charity in the Clinton Foundation,.

    It goes something like this, the Clintons pick an African dictator to prop up by giving them "aid" via the Clinton Foundation. It is money that the people of the country who need it see little if any of it. In return, the said dictator opens his doors to "development", specifically, those who can exploit the rich natural resources of the country that does not benefit the people. Those corporations that give large amounts of money to the Clinton Foundation are then able to go into these countries and make a ton of money. Later, Bill goes to the said country to give a "speech" for over half a million dollars, paid by someone close to the dictator.

    What is disgusting is that these dictators are ripe with human rights violations and do nothing for their people except steal from them and kill them if they get out of line. Meanwhile, the Clintons are singing their praises.

    Or as Secretary of State, Hillary flies into Haiti after a devastating earthquake and promises US aid.. She and Bill then decide what kind of aid they need, even if the people of Haiti do not agree. Of course, only those who give large amounts to the Clinton Foundation are allowed to enter the country to "help" as they are free to over charge by millions, courtesy of the America taxpayer.
  3. 14 Aug '16 21:00 / 1 edit
    This is something you will never hear from the media, because Hillary controls them

    Corporations are also in the back pocket of the Clintons, because they give them good business and know that if they need a bail out, Hillary is the go to person to take money from taxpayers to do the job.

    And certainly Hillary has nothing to fear from the FBI, DOB, or CIA, because all of these organizations are controlled by Obama.

    Hillary could murder someone on live TV and still win the general.
  4. 14 Aug '16 21:44
    Charitable grants are not a major focus of the Clinton Foundation, which instead keeps most of its money in house and hires staff to carry out its own humanitarian programs.[7] Because of this unusual structure for a foundation, Charity Navigator, a charity watchdog, has said it does not have a methodology to rate the Clinton Foundation.[7] Consequently, they added the foundation to their charity "watch list" in April 2015; it was removed from the "watch list" in December 2015 after the charity posted amended tax returns and a public memo on its website.[8] A different charity monitor, CharityWatch, says that 88% of the foundation's money goes toward its charitable mission and gave the foundation an A rating for 2016.[9]


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Foundation
  5. Subscriber FreakyKBH
    Acquired Taste...
    15 Aug '16 01:20
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Charitable grants are not a major focus of the Clinton Foundation, which instead keeps most of its money in house and hires staff to carry out its own humanitarian programs.[7] Because of this unusual structure for a foundation, Charity Navigator, a charity watchdog, has said it does not have a methodology to rate the Clinton Foundation.[7] Conse ...[text shortened]... foundation an A rating for 2016.[9]


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Foundation
    Great rebuttal.
    Noob.
  6. 15 Aug '16 02:52
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    Great rebuttal.
    Noob.
    Don't be so hard on them, they have no more bullets left.
  7. 15 Aug '16 03:50
    You know wiki can be edited by ANYBODY. Us govt. already be caught doing so.
  8. 15 Aug '16 06:29
    Originally posted by whodey
    Don't be so hard on them, they have no more bullets left.
    Yeah, no doubt your unsourced "10%" figure is more reliable than that of CharityWatch.
  9. 15 Aug '16 06:30
    Originally posted by kquinn909
    You know wiki can be edited by ANYBODY. Us govt. already be caught doing so.
    Try editing in a few deliberate errors in the Clinton Foundation article, and see how long they last.
  10. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    15 Aug '16 06:43
    Originally posted by kquinn909
    You know wiki can be edited by ANYBODY. Us govt. already be caught doing so.
    Can the CharityWatch website be "edited by anybody"? http://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillary-chelsea-clinton-foundation/478
  11. 15 Aug '16 10:15 / 4 edits
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Yeah, no doubt your unsourced "10%" figure is more reliable than that of CharityWatch.
    And according to the IRS, the Clinton's gave over a million dollars to "charity".

    What that does not tell you is that it is to their own charity and they get a large tax deduction. It is money they will get back and then some, hence money laundering

    Politicians are masters at hiding money. That is why politicians like Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are both only worth a few hundred thousand dollars on paper. They hide their money in real estate that does not get counted and lavish retirement plans and probably Swiss Bank accounts. It's what they put all their time and effort into, they look poor on paper but, in reality, have all the money and power in the word, with a superior health care plan to boot.

    So as we see, those keeping track of money going to charity may be deducting the money given to these corrupt dictators whose job it is to give the money to the poor. Perhaps they then deduct the food and money that never reaches those in need, even though on paper it should have
  12. 15 Aug '16 12:24 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by whodey
    This is something you will never hear from the media, because Hillary controls them

    Corporations are also in the back pocket of the Clintons, because they give them good business and know that if they need a bail out, Hillary is the go to person to take money from taxpayers to do the job.

    And certainly Hillary has nothing to fear from the FBI, DOB, or C ...[text shortened]... s are controlled by Obama.

    Hillary could murder someone on live TV and still win the general.
    I take back what I said about never hearing about this scandal in the news.

    If we look at the track record, what usually happens is that the story is presented as they sling poo at each other, but in the end, no one is actually held accountable for anything.

    Either those in the Belt way, like Charlie Rangel, are ethical and abide by the law or checks and balances are absent from the Federal government. You be the judge.
  13. 15 Aug '16 12:33
    Originally posted by whodey
    And according to the IRS, the Clinton's gave over a million dollars to "charity".

    What that does not tell you is that it is to their own charity and they get a large tax deduction. It is money they will get back and then some, hence money laundering

    Politicians are masters at hiding money. That is why politicians like Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are ...[text shortened]... deduct the food and money that never reaches those in need, even though on paper it should have
    Ah, you're doing a classic Trump. You get caught blatantly propagating a lie and/or falsehood, instead of admitting your mistake you just double down, and then change the subject into something even more idiotic, like saying donating to charity is "money laundering."
  14. 15 Aug '16 12:54 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Ah, you're doing a classic Trump. You get caught blatantly propagating a lie and/or falsehood, instead of admitting your mistake you just double down, and then change the subject into something even more idiotic, like saying donating to charity is "money laundering."
    I am telling you what was on the documentary dingleberry. I did not produce nor write it. I merely present it here to be debated, so stop with the liar crap.

    As I said, money on the books does not always reflect money in real time, as we see in other examples in society. Do you even know what the term money laundering means?

    As I said before, Hillary will be the next President and she will be there for two terms. None of what is presented here will stop her, nor what may be released from WikiLeaks will stop her, but I think it is still important for people to understand the power that controls them.
  15. 15 Aug '16 13:35
    Originally posted by whodey
    I am telling you what was on the documentary dingleberry. I did not produce nor write it. I merely present it here to be debated, so stop with the liar crap.

    As I said, money on the books does not always reflect money in real time, as we see in other examples in society. Do you even know what the term money laundering means?

    As I said before, Hillary ...[text shortened]... op her, but I think it is still important for people to understand the power that controls them.
    I am telling you what was on the documentary dingleberry. I did not produce nor write it. I merely present it here to be debated, so stop with the liar crap.

    In light of the fact that your "documentary" spreads known and easily verifiable falsehoods, don't you think that your cop-out is a bit lazy and cowardly? You know, after being confronted with spreading lies and falsehoods for the umpteenth time, perhaps it is time to reconsider the kind of sources of "information" you prefer? Just some food for thought.

    As I said, money on the books does not always reflect money in real time, as we see in other examples in society. Do you even know what the term money laundering means?

    I'm no legal expert, but I'm still fairly certain donating to charity isn't money laundering.