Hillary has been laughing all the way to the bank for decades and you think the right has been conned?
Oh my.....what do you have against rich people? Why are you jealous of her wealth? She didn't start a fake University...
It wasn't a fake university.
Bwahahaha....now you're going to try and make me believe it wasn't a fake university? He's really done a number on your one-cell brain.
You need to quit gobbling up leftist shit. There were many satisfied with it, some weren't, but that's true with anything. Lot's of accredited universities ripping off students and lefties yawn in indifference. Unless it's their bill.
He's being sued over its fakeness.....you can't make that shit up.
Donald Trump sued for $40 million over 'phony' university that 'falsely' promised to make students rich
The Clintons have made a lot of money with influence peddling. A quarter million for 20 minute speeches and you think it's legit? You've been had.
Romney made a lot of money from his speeches....I didn't hear you yakking about that when you voted for him in 2012......hypocrite.
Romney's speech income big money for most
Romney didn't peddle influence. The Clintons did it back in the WH days. You could rent the Lincoln bedroom for enough dough. A lawsuit is proof to you?
You haven't provided any proof about the Clintons....just a lot of lip.
And no, not just the lawsuit.....the fact that Trumpf is jumping hoops and exposing his racism over it shows that he's really scared that it will be declared a "fake" university and he will have to make restitution. He may not have the money to pay back.....even though he's been bragging about how rich he is, we may find out the truth (that it was just bragging) even if he doesn't release his tax returns.
Your lip won't do either then if you insist on being a smug asshole. But then again, you're a liberal. Just because the media covers it up, hammers Republicans you see no wrong. You're a KoolAid gulper.
Fact-Checking Hillary: No, the Clinton Foundation Hasn't Operated With 'Complete Transparency'
Credit to MSNBC's Rachel Maddow for asking about a thorny issue that has largely receded to the back burner for Hillary -- perhaps rightfully so, given the fact that she's reportedly about to be
questioned by the FBI over a separate scandal, about which she's
lied constantly. Nevertheless, the heart of the Clinton Foundation controversy sits at the intersection of big money and power politics.
It represents exactly the sort of unholy, influence-peddling and -purchasing system that Hillary's primary opponent has railed against, to great electoral effect. Watch as Mrs. Clinton assures viewers that any concerns about her family foundation serving as a giant dodgy political "
slush fund" (as one good government watchdog called it) should be allayed by her...
commitment to transparency.
First off, if you haven't already, go back and read my
12-point summary of a devastating
Washington Post expose of how Hillary's email scheme came to exist and explode into a national security scandal. The story makes very clear that a major motivating factor for Mrs. Clinton to break the rules and compromise classified material was her near-pathological desire for secrecy, in violation of her own "transparency" rhetoric. She has no respect for the concept. Invoking it here simply isn't credible. Secondly, we know that
nearly 200 Clinton Foundation donorsactively lobbied the State Department while Hillary was running the place (sometimes resulting in
extremely questionable outcomes), and that Bill Clinton
raked in millionsin speaking fees from entities and corporations that were doing the same. Under Hillary's explanation, none of this should be an issue, thanks to their meticulous transparency efforts. Got that? Okay. Now please allow me to share a few headlines, plus a flashback New York Times excerpt:
(1) Clinton Foundation Failed to Disclose 1,100 Foreign Donations (
Bloomberg): "There are in fact 1,100 undisclosed donors to the Clinton Foundation, Giustra says, most of them non-U.S. residents who donated to CGEP... in 2008, the Clinton Foundation signed a 'memorandum of understanding' with the Obama White House agreeing to reveal its contributors every year. The agreement stipulates that the 'Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative' (as the charity was then known) is part of the Clinton Foundation and must follow 'the same protocols.' It hasn’t."
(2) Clinton charity never provided foreign donor data (
Boston Globe): "An unprecedented ethics promise that played a pivotal role in helping Hillary Rodham Clinton win confirmation as secretary of state, soothing senators’ concerns about conflicts of interests with Clinton family charities, was uniformly bypassed by the biggest of the philanthropies involved. The Clinton Health Access Initiative never submitted information on any foreign donations to State Department lawyers for review during Clinton’s tenure from 2009 to 2013...During that time, grants from foreign governments increased by tens of millions of dollars to the Boston-based organization."
(3) Clinton charities will refile tax returns, audit for other errors (
Reuters): "Hillary Clinton's family's charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors...For three years in a row beginning in 2010, the Clinton Foundation reported to the IRS that it received zero in funds from foreign and U.S. governments, a dramatic fall-off from the tens of millions of dollars in foreign government contributions reported in preceding years. Those entries were errors, according to the foundation...Some experts in charity law and taxes said it was not remarkable for a charity to refile an erroneous return once in a while, but for a large, global charity to refile three or four years in a row was highly unusual."
(4) And here are some serious reported details on a highly controversial and suspect uranium deal involving the Russians, approved by Hillary's State Department (
New York Times):
As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation.
Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well. And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One,
Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock. At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians.
Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show.
"Very transparent...all contributors will be disclosed." They weren't. "Foreign government pledges will be submitted to the State Department for review." They weren't. And that "extremely low percentage" of funds going to overhead? Very dubious, which is why the Clintons' "charities" (click through for an explanation of the scare quotes) have been flagged by oversight groups. Charity Navigator removed the Clinton Foundation from its 'Watch List' late last year, under what we know to be immense political pressure. Hillary Clinton: She is who we think she is. 
