When the house is crooked - check the foundation

[Ame®icano]

What on earth are you trying to show with those charts? Neither says anything about grants, assistance and gifts as an expense. In fact, the closest thing shown to that is the Contributions, Gifts & Grants from the second chart which is the main source of revenue, not an expense.

I'm not talking about revenue in form of government grants: ~$15 mill

I am talking about grants, assistance and gifts listed under expense: ~$5 mill

 

[Ame®icano]

YOU and others are simply too easily duped and never seem to bother to do your own research Americano.... that's a problem of your own character and making....and I suppose a bit of naivete in trusting your right wing media propagandists. I always fact check everything but I have the time since I do not work outside of the home anymore....


In order to get a fuller picture of the Clinton Foundation’s operations, he said, people need to look at the foundation’s consolidated audit, which includes the financial data on separate affiliates like the Clinton Health Access Initiative.

“Otherwise,” he said, “you are looking at just a piece of the pie.”

Considering all of the organizations affiliated with the Clinton Foundation, he said, CharityWatch concluded about 89 percent of its budget is spent on programs. That’s the amount it spent on charity in 2013, he said.

We looked at the consolidated financial statements (see page 4) and calculated that in 2013, 88.3 percent of spending was designated as going toward program services — $196.6 million out of $222.6 million in reported expenses.

We can’t vouch for the effectiveness of the programming expenses listed in the report, but it is clear that the claim that the Clinton Foundation only steers 6 percent of its donations to charity is wrong, and amounts to a misunderstanding of how public charities work.

Where Does Clinton Foundation Money Go?

Thanks for the links.

Now, lets do some basic math.

Total Expenses ~$91M

Salaries & Professional fees ~$43M
Travel ~$20M

If you just add those two, that's more then 2/3 of the revenue not spent on programs.

There are thousands of charities in the US and they all fill out the tax forms including 990. They all have money in (revenue) and money out (program expenses, admin expenses, fundraisers and advertising).

The Clinton Foundation own forms shows their program expenses are ~$5 mill or less then 3% of their revenue. You don't have to trust me, or look for the explanation on the internet, just open their own forms and check it out yourself.

Programs are not an expense on the list in your OP. It isn't broken down that way. You are complaining about something nonexistent. Unless you are trying to say that grants, assistance, gifts is the same as programs?

If not, where are the program expenses?

 

[Montrovant]

YOU and others are simply too easily duped and never seem to bother to do your own research Americano.... that's a problem of your own character and making....and I suppose a bit of naivete in trusting your right wing media propagandists. I always fact check everything but I have the time since I do not work outside of the home anymore....


In order to get a fuller picture of the Clinton Foundation’s operations, he said, people need to look at the foundation’s consolidated audit, which includes the financial data on separate affiliates like the Clinton Health Access Initiative.

“Otherwise,” he said, “you are looking at just a piece of the pie.”

Considering all of the organizations affiliated with the Clinton Foundation, he said, CharityWatch concluded about 89 percent of its budget is spent on programs. That’s the amount it spent on charity in 2013, he said.

We looked at the consolidated financial statements (see page 4) and calculated that in 2013, 88.3 percent of spending was designated as going toward program services — $196.6 million out of $222.6 million in reported expenses.

We can’t vouch for the effectiveness of the programming expenses listed in the report, but it is clear that the claim that the Clinton Foundation only steers 6 percent of its donations to charity is wrong, and amounts to a misunderstanding of how public charities work.

Where Does Clinton Foundation Money Go?

Thanks for the links.

Now, lets do some basic math.

Total Expenses ~$91M

Salaries & Professional fees ~$43M
Travel ~$20M

If you just add those two, that's more then 2/3 of the revenue not spent on programs.

There are thousands of charities in the US and they all fill out the tax forms including 990. They all have money in (revenue) and money out (program expenses, admin expenses, fundraisers and advertising).

The Clinton Foundation own forms shows their program expenses are ~$5 mill or less then 3% of their revenue. You don't have to trust me, or look for the explanation on the internet, just open their own forms and check it out yourself.

Programs are not an expense on the list in your OP. It isn't broken down that way. You are complaining about something nonexistent. Unless you are trying to say that grants, assistance, gifts is the same as programs?

If not, where are the program expenses?

I would imagine that other expenses are listed instead. Salaries, travel, office expenses, those are all involved in whatever programs are done.

 

[Montrovant]

What on earth are you trying to show with those charts? Neither says anything about grants, assistance and gifts as an expense. In fact, the closest thing shown to that is the Contributions, Gifts & Grants from the second chart which is the main source of revenue, not an expense.

I'm not talking about revenue in form of government grants: ~$15 mill

I am talking about grants, assistance and gifts listed under expense: ~$5 mill

I'm asking what you are trying to show with the charts you just recently posted, which you seemed to be saying were from the Wounded Warrior Project.

 

[Ame®icano]

What on earth are you trying to show with those charts? Neither says anything about grants, assistance and gifts as an expense. In fact, the closest thing shown to that is the Contributions, Gifts & Grants from the second chart which is the main source of revenue, not an expense.

I'm not talking about revenue in form of government grants: ~$15 mill

I am talking about grants, assistance and gifts listed under expense: ~$5 mill

I'm asking what you are trying to show with the charts you just recently posted, which you seemed to be saying were from the Wounded Warrior Project.

Those charts are for comparison, WWP is just an example of how big organisation do their financials. WWP has salaries, travel, fundraisers, program expenses, and they just as every other charity show it clearly in their tax forms.

By the way, the "other expenses" are Management and General Expenses, therefore not a program cost.

 

[Montrovant]

What on earth are you trying to show with those charts? Neither says anything about grants, assistance and gifts as an expense. In fact, the closest thing shown to that is the Contributions, Gifts & Grants from the second chart which is the main source of revenue, not an expense.

I'm not talking about revenue in form of government grants: ~$15 mill

I am talking about grants, assistance and gifts listed under expense: ~$5 mill

I'm asking what you are trying to show with the charts you just recently posted, which you seemed to be saying were from the Wounded Warrior Project.

Those charts are for comparison, WWP is just an example of how big organisation do their financials. WWP has salaries, travel, fundraisers, program expenses, and they just as every other charity show it clearly in their tax forms.

By the way, the "other expenses" are Management and General Expenses, therefore not a program cost.

And yet the WWP charts don't show grants, assistance and gifts as an expense.

As has been said before, apparently the Clinton Foundation uses a different organizational model than most charities. That would be reflected in their expenses.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Clinton foundation became the center of the investigation again, after the FBI recovered deleted emails from Clinton's private server.

Reminder, only 2.9% of Clinton Foundation revenue was actually used for donations, grants and helping others.

The Clinton Foundation

You lie. Since the Clinton foundation does most of its charity work inhouse, and none of that money gets counted as 'donations' or 'grants', your 2.9% figure is clearly designed to dishonestly represent the charitable work of the foundation.

 

[Ame®icano]

What on earth are you trying to show with those charts? Neither says anything about grants, assistance and gifts as an expense. In fact, the closest thing shown to that is the Contributions, Gifts & Grants from the second chart which is the main source of revenue, not an expense.

I'm not talking about revenue in form of government grants: ~$15 mill

I am talking about grants, assistance and gifts listed under expense: ~$5 mill

I'm asking what you are trying to show with the charts you just recently posted, which you seemed to be saying were from the Wounded Warrior Project.

Those charts are for comparison, WWP is just an example of how big organisation do their financials. WWP has salaries, travel, fundraisers, program expenses, and they just as every other charity show it clearly in their tax forms.

By the way, the "other expenses" are Management and General Expenses, therefore not a program cost.

And yet the WWP charts don't show grants, assistance and gifts as an expense.

As has been said before, apparently the Clinton Foundation uses a different organizational model than most charities. That would be reflected in their expenses.

There are two types of grants: received and given away.

Those received are counted under revenue, and those given are program expense.

CF has both.

WWP has them under revenue. If they have it under expense, it would be under Program Expenses. I'm not sure, I have to check their tax forms.

 

[Ame®icano]

Clinton foundation became the center of the investigation again, after the FBI recovered deleted emails from Clinton's private server.

Reminder, only 2.9% of Clinton Foundation revenue was actually used for donations, grants and helping others.

The Clinton Foundation

You lie. Since the Clinton foundation does most of its charity work inhouse, and none of that money gets counted as 'donations' or 'grants', your 2.9% figure is clearly designed to dishonestly represent the charitable work of the foundation.

Inhouse charity... right on. Commonly known as... say it with me: Slush fund.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Clinton foundation became the center of the investigation again, after the FBI recovered deleted emails from Clinton's private server.

Reminder, only 2.9% of Clinton Foundation revenue was actually used for donations, grants and helping others.

The Clinton Foundation

You lie. Since the Clinton foundation does most of its charity work inhouse, and none of that money gets counted as 'donations' or 'grants', your 2.9% figure is clearly designed to dishonestly represent the charitable work of the foundation.

Inhouse charity... right on. Commonly known as... say it with me: Slush fund.

You lie. It's when a foundation does charity work with its own people as opposed to giving the money to someone else.

You're retarded. Kill yourself and make room for a normal person.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Clinton foundation became the center of the investigation again, after the FBI recovered deleted emails from Clinton's private server.

Reminder, only 2.9% of Clinton Foundation revenue was actually used for donations, grants and helping others.

The Clinton Foundation

You lie. Since the Clinton foundation does most of its charity work inhouse, and none of that money gets counted as 'donations' or 'grants', your 2.9% figure is clearly designed to dishonestly represent the charitable work of the foundation.

Inhouse charity... right on. Commonly known as... say it with me: Slush fund.

Since you are ineducable I am well aware that I am probably wasting my time, but here's the truth:

The Clinton foundation is an 'operating foundation'.

Definition of Private Operating Foundation

 

[Ame®icano]

Inhouse charity... right on. Commonly known as... say it with me: Slush fund.

Since you are ineducable I am well aware that I am probably wasting my time, but here's the truth:

The Clinton foundation is an 'operating foundation'.

Definition of Private Operating Foundation

You lefties are out of sync. In post #49 Care4all also lectured me about what Clinton Foundation actually is:

If you and others actually did your homework, you WOULD KNOW that the Clinton Foundations is a public OPERATING Charity and not a Private Charity....

Even without my input, either Care4all or you is obviously wrong. I'll let two of you decide on that.

Now back to your claim. First of all, you lefties think you know everything by default and you can just talk someone down without being challenged. Well, thanks for "educating" me, and making a fool of yourself.

Second, did you actually check links within your link?

According to IRS, in order to qualify as Private Operation Foundation, it must meet certain requirements and pass one of qualifying tests, then they provided explanation for each. Every link leads to more links that give further explanation of subcategories. And what are they saying? Lets see:

Private Operating Foundation is:
Nongovernmental - check
Nonprofit organization - check
Managed by its own trustees or directors - check
Charitable organization - let's say check (it seems charitable to Clinton own benefits)
Financial support came from one source (usually an individual, family, or company) - nope
Annual expenditures are funded out of earnings from investment assets - nope
Makes grants to other organizations for charitable purposes, rather than to its own programs - check

I'll let you and Care4all discuss which one of you is wrong and give you time to do some reading, and then come back to re-educate the ineducable.

It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. - Ronald Reagan

 

[francoHFW]

A private foundation which I believe is how the Clinton Foundation is set up requires a minimum of 5% payout per year. I'm not a tax expert but I think that is correct. So if your 2.9% payout is right they are not even complying with the tax code.

They do the good works THEMSELVES. More total bs and ignorance from brainwashed dupes...

 

[francoHFW]

Inhouse charity... right on. Commonly known as... say it with me: Slush fund.

Since you are ineducable I am well aware that I am probably wasting my time, but here's the truth:

The Clinton foundation is an 'operating foundation'.

Definition of Private Operating Foundation

You lefties are out of sync. In post #49 Care4all also lectured me about what Clinton Foundation actually is:

If you and others actually did your homework, you WOULD KNOW that the Clinton Foundations is a public OPERATING Charity and not a Private Charity....

Even without my input, either Care4all or you is obviously wrong. I'll let two of you decide on that.

Now back to your claim. First of all, you lefties think you know everything by default and you can just talk someone down without being challenged. Well, thanks for "educating" me, and making a fool of yourself.

Second, did you actually check links within your link?

According to IRS, in order to qualify as Private Operation Foundation, it must meet certain requirements and pass one of qualifying tests, then they provided explanation for each. Every link leads to more links that give further explanation of subcategories. And what are they saying? Lets see:

Private Operating Foundation is:
Nongovernmental - check
Nonprofit organization - check
Managed by its own trustees or directors - check
Charitable organization - let's say check (it seems charitable to Clinton own benefits)
Financial support came from one source (usually an individual, family, or company) - nope
Annual expenditures are funded out of earnings from investment assets - nope
Makes grants to other organizations for charitable purposes, rather than to its own programs - check

I'll let you and Care4all discuss which one of you is wrong and give you time to do some reading, and then come back to re-educate the ineducable.

It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. - Ronald Reagan

Point is, the OP is total crap propaganda, for dupes only. And supposedly proves Hillary is crooked, like the huge pile of other GOP lies for 25 years. And careless US voters think it means something...

 

[Ame®icano]

Point is, the OP is total crap propaganda, for dupes only. And supposedly proves Hillary is crooked, like the huge pile of other GOP lies for 25 years. And careless US voters think it means something...

Looks who's here, franco finally shows up. I'm wondering is Lakhota anywhere near, since two of you usually come in pair and when all others fail to shut the thread down.

JakeStarkey is just spam generator, no discussion of any sort, his job is to derail the thread.
NYCarabineer is an "educator". He comes in and throw "it looks legit" links to educate the uneducated and give the ammo to Lakhota and Franco and alike, who are "enforcers, or board thugs". Their job is to discredit others as liars, bigots, racist, depending on a topic.

 

[Ame®icano]

Just for you franco, more propaganda.

Clinton Foundation largest donors, $25 mill or more:

Nationale Postcode Loterij
UNITAID
The Children's Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF)
Frank Guistra, The Radcliffe Foundation
Fred Eychaner, Alphawood Foundation
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Clinton Guistra Enterprise Partnership

Shall we discuss any of these... Guistra or CIFF, perhaps?

 

[RandallFlagg]

Clinton foundation became the center of the investigation again, after the FBI recovered deleted emails from Clinton's private server.

Reminder, only 2.9% of Clinton Foundation revenue was actually used for donations, grants and helping others.

The Clinton Foundation

You lie. Since the Clinton foundation does most of its charity work inhouse, and none of that money gets counted as 'donations' or 'grants', your 2.9% figure is clearly designed to dishonestly represent the charitable work of the foundation.

Inhouse charity... right on. Commonly known as... say it with me: Slush fund.

Since you are ineducable I am well aware that I am probably wasting my time, but here's the truth:

The Clinton foundation is an 'operating foundation'.

Definition of Private Operating Foundation

Like I've said before CIA, the ***** could blow a babies head off in the middle of NYC and you "mouthpieces" would say that she was innocent.

You people are despicable.

 

[Ame®icano]

A new congressional letter is now circulating among lawmakers that charges the ClintonFoundation is a “lawless, “Pay-to-Play” enterprise that has been operating under a cloak of philanthropy for years.”The letter obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation and authored by rep. Marsha Blackburn, is to be sent to FBI Director James Comey, Internal Revenue Service Commissioner John Koskinen and Federal Trade Commission chairwoman Edith Ramirez. The letter calls upon the three agencies to launch a “public corruption” investigation into the ties between Clinton Foundation donors and Hillary Clinton's policies as Secretary of State.

House Letter Calls Clinton Foundation ‘Lawless’

 

[Ame®icano]

Cover up continues...

Justice Department declined FBI request to investigate Clinton Foundation

 

[francoHFW]

Cover up continues...

Justice Department declined FBI request to investigate Clinton Foundation

Any REAL media reporting that? Who started that bs story? lol