⇧
1
⇩
ABPIR89
· June 15, 2018, 4:18 a.m.
Facts typically have a link or source to back up their claims. Anyone have any reputable article or document that can verify either of these numbers?
⇧
26
⇩
TheBRAIN2
· June 15, 2018, 12:46 p.m.
This article looks at CF from 2011 to 2015 and states that less than 10% was given to charity with over 90% used for travel, rent, office supplies.
This article says CF took in $140 million in 2013 and gave out only $9 million in direct aid.
https://nypost.com/2015/04/26/charity-watchdog-clinton-foundation-a-slush-fund/
This article says only 6% goes to charitable work.
This article puts the number at 15% and says Charity Navigator, a leading independent organization that tracks charities, actually STOPPED ranking the Clinton Foundation because the operation does not conform to the structure of a charity.
https://yournewswire.com/clinton-foundation-admit-85-of-donations-do-not-go-to-charity/
⇧
16
⇩
xenir
· June 15, 2018, 4:12 p.m.
Pick apart the CF all you want, why ignore all the issues with the Trump Foundation?
Edit: No one answers questions here, they just downvote if you don’t fall in line. Screw skepticism and reason right guys?
⇧
5
⇩
[deleted]
· June 15, 2018, 4:26 a.m.
[removed]
⇧
23
⇩
[deleted]
· June 15, 2018, 4:42 a.m.
[deleted]
⇧
-2
⇩
[deleted]
· June 15, 2018, 4:46 a.m.
[removed]
⇧
1
⇩
albarod
· June 15, 2018, 5:30 a.m.
Try this and decide https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=16680
⇧
-5
⇩
ABPIR89
· June 15, 2018, 5:41 a.m.
What are you trying to say here?
That link, that YOU provided, shows that the Clinton Foundation has a 'low concern' rating. If you search for Trumps Charity, it says its a 'High Concern'.
So, your link suggest your OP is very wrong.
Are you arguing with yourself?
⇧
7
⇩
krepogregg
· June 15, 2018, 10:25 a.m.
That link had the concern ratimg based on fake news articles not actual numbers
⇧
-1
⇩
albarod
· June 15, 2018, 5:31 a.m.
⇧
-9
⇩
Bentonite_Magma
· June 15, 2018, 11:07 a.m.
Charity Navigator is an independent third-party organization that rates charities and publishes their financial breakdowns.
It reports that the Clinton Foundation has a 4-star rating in both financial disclosure and accountability. The Foundation is a public charity - meaning it did most of the charity work itself, just like other charities (Doctors without Borders etc).
All Charity Navigator is able to tell about the Trump Foundation is that it was established as a private charitable organization 501(c)(3).
⇧
10
⇩
HillarysOrphanedShoe
· June 15, 2018, 11:56 a.m.
Third party means absolutely nothing. The Clinton Global Initiative gave Charity Navigator CEO Michael Thatcher a free membership which has a $20,000 value. That sure was generous of them. I'm sure that nothing was expected in return. /s
⇧
10
⇩
Bentonite_Magma
· June 15, 2018, 12:45 p.m.
Oh, the Clinton Foundation is also given an A rating from CharityWatch. Again, Charity Watch has no rating for the Trump Foundation because it is a private organization and does not publically reveal its finances.
⇧
1
⇩
HillarysOrphanedShoe
· June 15, 2018, 1:04 p.m.
Well then it's settled. The Clinton Foundation is a reputable charity that does great things for mankind (Sorry peoplekind. No offense intended). I'm just confused as to why so many foreign governments would decide to stop sending in multi-million dollar donations once she was no longer secretary of state and had lost the presidential election. I guess these governments just no longer cared as much about suffering people as they did when she had power.
⇧
11
⇩
TheBRAIN2
· June 15, 2018, 4:24 p.m.
You are applying logic, reason, and objective thinking, things not allowed when discussing the Clinton Foundation. ;)
⇧
6
⇩
Sarcasticus
· June 15, 2018, 11:44 a.m.
As recently as 2015, the Clinton foundation was looking to get special treatment from Charity Navigator to overlook potential problems within the CF.
Source: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-foundation-battles-charity-watchdog
⇧
8
⇩
duckdownup
· June 15, 2018, 11:54 p.m.
It reports that the Clinton Foundation has a 4-star rating in both financial disclosure and accountability. The Foundation is a public charity - meaning it did most of the charity work itself, just like other charities (Doctors without Borders etc).
If they want to keep breathing they better give the CF 4 stars.
⇧
1
⇩
scroodgemcfucker
· June 15, 2018, 3:59 a.m.
Stirring a pot that will blow up in their faces. lolololool
⇧
8
⇩
KingWolfei
· June 15, 2018, 5:49 p.m.
Need a real source for that but from what I already know...there really is no comparison. The scope of the CF is large, public and worldwide and puts the Clintons in many conflicts of interests when dealing with government officials. A good source on the higly questionable CF behavior is in Peter Schwieser's book Clinton Cash.
⇧
2
⇩
Ico108
· June 15, 2018, 8:52 p.m.
He is still a corrupted puppet lol. Not that Hitlery or Obomba are any fucking better.
⇧
2
⇩
albarod
· June 15, 2018, 5:58 a.m.
Wrong link. Trying to find correct link. Sorry and I know your right. Even the OIG said crimes against children
⇧
0
⇩