Thank you! From your link:Well,lol, that I would guess is certainly true. LOL So, tell me how they operate, since you know it is not "traditional".The Clinton Foundation is not a traditional "charity".
Clinton Foundation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Around 2007, the Clinton Foundation was criticized for a lack of transparency. Although U.S. law did not require nonprofit charities — including presidential foundations — to disclose the identities of their contributors, critics said that the names of donors should be disclosed because Hillary Rodham Clinton was running to be the Democratic nominee for President of the United States. Commentator Matthew Yglesias wrote in a Los Angeles Times op-ed that the Clintons should make public the names of foundation donors to avoid any appearance of impropriety.[
the ethics agreement between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation that was put into force at the beginning of the Secretary of State Clinton's tenure came under scrutiny from the news media during February 2015. A Wall Street Journal report found that the Clinton Foundation had resumed accepting donations from foreign governments once Secretary Clinton's tenure had ended.[66] Contributions from foreign donors who are prohibited by law from contributing to political candidates in the U.S. constitute a major portion of the foundation's income.
A Washington Post inquiry into donations by foreign governments to the Clinton Foundation during the secretary's tenure found six cases where such governments continued making donations at the same level they had before Clinton became secretary, which was permissible under the agreement, but also one instance of a new donation, $500,000 from Algeria for earthquake relief in Haiti, that was outside the bounds of the continuation provision and should have received a special ethics review, but did not.[9] Foundation officials said that if the former secretary decided to run for president in 2016, they would again consider what steps to take in reference to foreign donations.[
In March 2015, Reuters reported that the Clinton Foundation had broken its promise to publish all of its donors, as well as its promise to let the State Departmentreview all of its donations from foreign governments.[68] In April 2015, the New York Times reported that when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, the State Department had approved a deal to sell American uranium to Russians who had donated to the Clinton Foundation, and that Clinton had broken her promise to publicly identify such donations.[69] About this news, the other media made a list of questionable items.[70] In a May 2015 book regarding the Foundation, author Peter Schweizer wrote, "We see a pattern of financial transactions involving the Clintons that occurred contemporaneous with favorable U.S. policy decisions benefiting those providing the funds."[12] Clinton's campaign has denied any impropriety, and called the book part of the Republicans’ coordinated attack strategy on Mrs. Clinton "twisting previously known facts into absurd conspiracy theories".
After her January 2009 appointment as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton proposed hiring long-time Clinton friend and confidant Sidney Blumenthal as an advisor, however, Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, blocked Blumenthal's appointment at the State Department.[74] Blumenthal was subsequently hired by the Clinton Foundation, earning a Foundation salary of about $10,000 a month, and after the 2011 uprising in Libya against Muammar Gaddafi, Blumenthal prepared, from public and other sources, about 25 memos which he sent as emails to Clinton in 2011 and 2012 with advice regarding Libyan matters, and sometimes promoting his business associates for contract work in Libya.[75][76]
In May 2015, it was revealed that former Clinton aide and current ABC political news anchor George Stephanopoulos had, over a period of three years from 2012-2014 donated a total of $75,000, to the Clinton Foundation, but did not disclose the donations to ABC News, his employer, or to his viewers.[77] The donations had been reported by the Clinton Foundation, which Stephanopoulos had considered sufficient, a reliance ABC News characterized as "an honest mistake
So you know how to cut-and-paste.
What's your point, exactly?
Now, don't get testy. The highlighted information is important and verifies what I have been trying to tell you. Let's just say, shady and dishonest practices.
It doesn't "verify" anything that you've said - you just copy-and-pasted everything that looked like a scandal to you.
Can you explain, using your own words, why I should be scandalized by Sidney Blumenthal's employment at the Clinton Foundation?
Or are you now trying to change your argument to a generic "Hillary BAD!" post?