How about this list, is it true? No opinions please just links, thanks

[Freewill]

Clinton Foundation an Ineffective Charity According to New Watchdog Report

Charity Watchdog Drops Epic TRUTH BOMB on Clinton Foundation

The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.

The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.

On its 2013 tax forms, the most recent available, the foundation claimed it spent $30 million on payroll and employee benefits; $8.7 million in rent and office expenses; $9.2 million on “conferences, conventions and meetings”; $8 million on fundraising; and nearly $8.5 million on travel. None of the Clintons is on the payroll, but they do enjoy first-class flights paid for by the foundation.

 

[konradv]

According to Charity Watch, NOT TRUE.

Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch

 

[Freewill]

According to Charity Watch, NOT TRUE.

Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch

thanks for the link, interesting how two charity rating services come to different conclusions.

Here is what the Clinton administration admitted to, maybe it would effect their rating? Notice they did it on a Sunday, typical trying to hide the obvious.

"On Sunday, the acting chief executive of the Clinton Foundation acknowledged that the $2 billion global philanthropy has made "mistakes," notably failing to disclose to the IRS that it received millions in foreign government donations over some years that coincided with Clinton's service as secretary of state. CEO Maura Pally said the organization's overall revenue figures have been accurately reported to the IRS."

So was that a crime or not?

Trick question, laws don't apply to the Clintons.

Independent watch groups split on Clinton Foundation

Independent watch groups split on Clinton Foundation

 

[BULLDOG]

Clinton Foundation an Ineffective Charity According to New Watchdog Report

Charity Watchdog Drops Epic TRUTH BOMB on Clinton Foundation

The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.

The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.

On its 2013 tax forms, the most recent available, the foundation claimed it spent $30 million on payroll and employee benefits; $8.7 million in rent and office expenses; $9.2 million on “conferences, conventions and meetings”; $8 million on fundraising; and nearly $8.5 million on travel. None of the Clintons is on the payroll, but they do enjoy first-class flights paid for by the foundation.

Just read your link, but it didn't say which charity watchdog produced the report. Any reason to believe it's legitimate if there is no name associated with it?

 

[BULLDOG]

According to Charity Watch, NOT TRUE.

Charity Ratings | America's Most Independent, Assertive Charity Watchdog | CharityWatch

thanks for the link, interesting how two charity rating services come to different conclusions.

Here is what the Clinton administration admitted to, maybe it would effect their rating? Notice they did it on a Sunday, typical trying to hide the obvious.

"On Sunday, the acting chief executive of the Clinton Foundation acknowledged that the $2 billion global philanthropy has made "mistakes," notably failing to disclose to the IRS that it received millions in foreign government donations over some years that coincided with Clinton's service as secretary of state. CEO Maura Pally said the organization's overall revenue figures have been accurately reported to the IRS."

So was that a crime or not?

Trick question, laws don't apply to the Clintons.

Independent watch groups split on Clinton Foundation

Independent watch groups split on Clinton Foundation

Charity Navigator made no indication of whether the Clinton Foundation was less than exemplary in their charity work. When they receive third party accusations,they make note of it, but there is no reason to believe they agree with such accusations. This is just more dishonorable right wing tactics.
According to its Web site, Charity Navigator puts charities on the list whenever a third party identifies issues that potential donors might find interesting. It said it does not assess the merits of those accounts. In the case of the Clinton Foundation, it cited recent media accounts about foreign government donations.

 

[leftwinger]

For $10mil I will "trump" up a good report. Like Yelp does, if you pay up.