Sean Hannity's "Freedom Concerts" are a Scam

you really are a dumb shit.
I have heard Hannity state on his show that all the proceeds after cost go to this Charity.
you people are as low as a SNAKE.
like you give a shit that ANY of it is going to the troops, just so you all can use this to BASH Hannity. low low low.

:lol: You heard from the mouth of the snake himself? You really are a partisan hack.

I give a shit that any of it is going to the troops.

Only one who is low here is you for defending that bullshit.

Real charities like Wounded Warrior Project could use that money to do a lot of good.

the only SNAKE I see here is you and the people like you using this to Bash Hannity.
now go slitter away you PARTISIAN HACKoff
 
the only SNAKE I see here is you and the people like you using this to Bash Hannity.
now go slitter away you PARTISIAN HACKoff

I'm not using this to bash Hannity specifically. I'm using this to bash scum like Hannity and others like him who use our troops for personal and financial gain.

The only person here who is a partisan hack is you. I've shown evidence by using the tax returns themselves, all you have is partisan and angry rhetoric. The evidence is clear.
 
the only SNAKE I see here is you and the people like you using this to Bash Hannity.
now go slitter away you PARTISIAN HACKoff

I'm not using this to bash Hannity specifically. I'm using this to bash scum like Hannity and others like him who use our troops for personal and financial gain.

The only person here who is a partisan hack is you. I've shown evidence by using the tax returns themselves, all you have is partisan and angry rhetoric. The evidence is clear.

you are the biggest friggen liar and hack on this board.
man up for a change.
 
you are the biggest friggen liar and hack on this board.
man up for a change.

The biggest liar here is yourself who is not only cheating yourself by believing such delusions but cheating others by trying to feed them false information.
 
The charity is to help kids on a long term basis, not to give handouts.

You didn't bother to read how much these kids are getting are you?

Or how much they're getting in comparison to how much is going to "Postage and Shipping, Advisors, and Consultants."

The charity gave 3.4% of what it made in 2006. It spent 6 million+ more in "expenses" that aren't really expenses but more so a scam to pay people ridiculous amounts of money.

Let it be the GUVORNMUNT doing the same thing...these Neo-Cons would cry bloody murder.

Look at the tempest in a teapot they stirred over the NPR OPINION cartoon that acurately depicted the Tea-Baggers. They were up in arms about how their money is spent. Nevermind that actual government funds account for a mere 2% of NPR's income.

They then claimed that was too much.

Now watch them....

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif


What a bunch of jokers!

SMH
* :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Did you look through the tax returns or are you just parroting Debbie Schussel's hate and venom? Be honest

I looked through them and unless I missed something, they would be correct.

Where exactly do you assume she pulled these numbers out of by the way? Thin air?

You missed something out in the 8 figures column

Chances are Sean will answer her tomorrow, he shouldn't, she really has nothing but hate and venom, but if he does answer her, it won't be pretty.

She went way out of her way to misrepresent the Freedom Alliance


I like the organization's Director of Programs. (2008 is the only tax report that loaded for me).
 
The charity is to help kids on a long term basis, not to give handouts.

You didn't bother to read how much these kids are getting are you?

Or how much they're getting in comparison to how much is going to "Postage and Shipping, Advisors, and Consultants."

The charity gave 3.4% of what it made in 2006. It spent 6 million+ more in "expenses" that aren't really expenses but more so a scam to pay people ridiculous amounts of money.

Let it be the GUVORNMUNT doing the same thing...these Neo-Cons would cry bloody murder.

Look at the tempest in a teapot they stirred over the NPR OPINION cartoon that acurately depicted the Tea-Baggers. They were up in arms about how their money is spent. Nevermind that actual government funds account for a mere 2% of NPR's income.

They then claimed that was too much.

Now watch them....

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif


What a bunch of jokers!

SMH
* :rolleyes:

holy moly, like this has anything to do this thread.:cuckoo:
 
hannity is sad sad little man that discoverd that by lying and cheating he could appeal to a segment of the uneducated bitter little people scatered across this country. He found a network that encourages lying to broadcast his propaganda -a network that in fact sued to protect its right to lie- and employs many more pathetic excuses for human beings who have decided to get rich by appealing to the stupid hateful racist pitiful people in this country.
 
hannity is sad sad little man that discoverd that by lying and cheating he could appeal to a segment of the uneducated bitter little people scatered across this country. He found a network that encourages lying to broadcast his propaganda -a network that in fact sued to protect its right to lie- and employs many more pathetic excuses for human beings who have decided to get rich by appealing to the stupid hateful racist pitiful people in this country.

whooboy, that's a real barfer.:lol:
 
Just when I thought he couldn't get any lower..

Sean Hannity’s Freedom CONcert Scam: Almost None of Charity’s $ Went to Injured Troops, Kids of Fallen Troops; G5s for Vannity?

In fact, less than 20%–and in two recent years, less than 7% and 4%, respectively–of the money raised by Freedom Alliance went to these causes, while millions of dollars went to expenses, including consultants and apparently to ferret the Hannity posse of family and friends in high style. And, despite Hannity’s statements to the contrary on his nationally syndicated radio show, few of the children of fallen soldiers got more than $1,000-$2,000, with apparently none getting more than $6,000, while Freedom Alliance appears to have spent tens of thousands of dollars for private planes. Moreover, despite written assurances to donors that all money raised would go directly to scholarships for kids of the fallen heroes and not to expenses, has begun charging expenses of nearly $500,000 to give out just over $800,000 in scholarships.

The tax forms available to the public for the Freedom Alliance–for the years 2006-2008–paint a tragic story, a story of a charity that makes gazillions and spends very little for the purposes it claims, a charity that spends millions more on its small staff and crony consultants than it ever gives in scholarships to the children of the fallen or severely injured troops or in aid to the injured troops themselves. While Hannity’s Freedom Concerts take in millions, only a few hundred thousand go to the claimed intended recipients.







And then, there are the 2008 Freedom Alliance tax forms, which were signed in November 2009 and filed only recently. That year, Freedom Alliance took in $8,781,431 in revenue and gave $1,060,275.57 total–or just 12%–to seriously wounded soldiers and for scholarships to kids of the fallen. Remember, this is well below the 75% required to be considered a legitimate charity. And after claiming in written letters to donors that 100% of the money donated, via the Freedom Concerts or otherwise, to the scholarships would go directly to the scholarships and not to expenses, the Freedom Alliance decided to do the contrary and charge expenses anyway–charging a whopping $436,386 to give out $802,250 in scholarships. That means that 35% of the $1,238,636–all of which was supposed to go to scholarships for these kids of the fallen–went to Freedom Alliance.

I learned that the organizations which evaluate charities are entirely worthless. Freedom Alliance is certified as “Best in America” by the “Independent Charities of America.” It is also rated a “Four Star Charity” by “Charity Navigator.” Both of these “ratings” are posted prominently on Freedom Alliance’s website, misleading donors into believing they are donating to a worthy cause, when in fact they are mostly donating to a black hole of expenses. Even Charity Navigator notes in its strange, illogical, and mostly inaccurate Four Star rating that Freedom Alliance has a fund-raising “efficiency” of only nine cents on the dollar.

View attachment 9760

Gee imagine my surprize that the ONLY major news outlet to pay the BIG BUCKS in court to have the right to lie to the American people would hire a fucking liar like Hannity.
 
You didn't bother to read how much these kids are getting are you?

Or how much they're getting in comparison to how much is going to "Postage and Shipping, Advisors, and Consultants."

The charity gave 3.4% of what it made in 2006. It spent 6 million+ more in "expenses" that aren't really expenses but more so a scam to pay people ridiculous amounts of money.

Let it be the GUVORNMUNT doing the same thing...these Neo-Cons would cry bloody murder.

Look at the tempest in a teapot they stirred over the NPR OPINION cartoon that acurately depicted the Tea-Baggers. They were up in arms about how their money is spent. Nevermind that actual government funds account for a mere 2% of NPR's income.

They then claimed that was too much.

Now watch them....

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif


What a bunch of jokers!

SMH
* :rolleyes:

holy moly, like this has anything to do this thread.:cuckoo:

Your Honor, I present to you Exhibit A: The Hit Dog Syndrome:

Notice how all one has to do is call the name of the group, in this case "Neo-Cons" and one of their most fervent members, in this case, Stephanie, HAS to come screaming and crying to its defense.

Your Honor...I rest my case.
 
If Barack Obama ran a charity that gave away 3.72% of what it made one year in contributions but spent 62% in expenses, Stephanie would be screaming from sea to sea.
 
Let it be the GUVORNMUNT doing the same thing...these Neo-Cons would cry bloody murder.

Look at the tempest in a teapot they stirred over the NPR OPINION cartoon that acurately depicted the Tea-Baggers. They were up in arms about how their money is spent. Nevermind that actual government funds account for a mere 2% of NPR's income.

They then claimed that was too much.

Now watch them....

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif


What a bunch of jokers!

SMH
* :rolleyes:

holy moly, like this has anything to do this thread.:cuckoo:

Your Honor, I present to you Exhibit A: The Hit Dog Syndrome:

Notice how all one has to do is call the name of the group, in this case "Neo-Cons" and one of their most fervent members, in this case, Stephanie, HAS to come screaming and crying to its defense.

Your Honor...I rest my case.

yeah sure you did.
not sure what that case was? well neither did we.:lol:
 
NewsFlash to the dumb:

You're not "Your Honor."

49izadw.gif
 
Last edited:
SO, exactly WHY does it matter to anyone just HOW much money Hannity has going to a Charity?

and just why is this anyone's Business?

I believe the issue is how much of the donations his charitable organization receives are actually used for charity.

People who give to charity tend to care how their money is spent.

In various State's the Attorneys General keep lists of various charitable institutions and break-down the amount of money each spends ON the actual charitable purpose as compared to "administrative" expenses. So, for illustration, let's say that "Save the Children" gets reported in the 90+% range. That's purdy good.

Some other charitable institution may be compelled to spend a higher percentage on "administrative" expenses. When I have made contributions in the past, I have used such figures to make an assessment of where my donations would provide the most bang for the buck.

The trouble here is that it can lead to some confusion. It is often difficult to compare different charitable institutions based solely on a single factor such as "how much is used for "administrative" expenses?

If Freedom Alliance is raising funds by having concerts, then there are, certainly, significant sets of expenses that have to be laid out to GET TO the point where the contributions can start coming-in. Venue rentals don't come cheap. Even where the artists DONATE their performances and time, they still need accommodations. Hotels ain't cheap and bigger stars don't get shunted off to Motel 6. Advertising also isn't cheap. Travel expenses are significant. Mail (mass mailings to collect contributions) costs are obviously significant (just look at the tab for postage, etc).

But I believe that what CrusaderFrank is pointing out is also significant. IF Freedom Alliance is providing scholarships, they PROBABLY are doing a huge amount of INVESTING* in order to generate a steady income. So it is as misleading as hell to say "Freedom Alliance took in X dollars, but only spend 1/4 of X dollars on scholarships! Izza outwage!" Of course they would want to INVEST to GENERATE additional "income" in order to CONTINUE PROVIDING scholarships on an on-going basis.

__________________
* and lo and behold, if one READS the income tax reporting from 2008, one FINDS a huge amount of money "spent" on "investments!" Jolly GOOD! That's pretty much what they should be doing since they NEED to do so!
 
In various State's the Attorneys General keep lists of various charitable institutions and break-down the amount of money each spends ON the actual charitable purpose as compared to "administrative" expenses. So, for illustration, let's say that "Save the Children" gets reported in the 90+% range. That's purdy good.

Some other charitable institution may be compelled to spend a higher percentage on "administrative" expenses. When I have made contributions in the past, I have used such figures to make an assessment of where my donations would provide the most bang for the buck.

The trouble here is that it can lead to some confusion. It is often difficult to compare different charitable institutions based solely on a single factor such as "how much is used for "administrative" expenses?

If Freedom Alliance is raising funds by having concerts, then there are, certainly, significant sets of expenses that have to be laid out to GET TO the point where the contributions can start coming-in. Venue rentals don't come cheap. Even where the artists DONATE their performances and time, they still need accommodations. Hotels ain't cheap and bigger stars don't get shunted off to Motel 6. Advertising also isn't cheap. Travel expenses are significant. Mail (mass mailings to collect contributions) costs are obviously significant (just look at the tab for postage, etc).

But I believe that what CrusaderFrank is pointing out is also significant. IF Freedom Alliance is providing scholarships, they PROBABLY are doing a huge amount of INVESTING* in order to generate a steady income. So it is as misleading as hell to say "Freedom Alliance took in X dollars, but only spend 1/4 of X dollars on scholarships! Izza outwage!" Of course they would want to INVEST to GENERATE additional "income" in order to CONTINUE PROVIDING scholarships on an on-going basis.

__________________
* and lo and behold, if one READS the income tax reporting from 2008, one FINDS a huge amount of money "spent" on "investments!" Jolly GOOD! That's pretty much what they should be doing since they NEED to do so!

All these are in fact good points. HOWEVER...

Exactly how much of the total is actually being invested?

What percentage of the proceeds go to operating(administrative) costs and what percentage in total is actually donated to the people the fund is supposed to benefit?

And, most importantly, is the money that is being invested "untouchable"? Is it being put into trust fund accounts that cannot then be accessed by members of the organization for nefarious purposes?

It is not partisan to question the quality of a charity. If his organization is not donating a certain amount of the proceeds, then it does not in fact qualify as a charity.

I myself give generously to organizations that benefit Veterans and the families of Veterans and I always do my homework to check and make sure that they are on the up-and-up.

Honestly, looking at the numbers here, I would say that this charity is, at the very least, of a low-quality, relative to other charities that offer the same services with less administrative costs.
 

Forum List

Back
Top