Obama Goes Full Clinton Foundation With Series Of $400,000 Wall Street Speeches
- Thread starter Tsing Tao
- Start date
Here's what I say. And I hope you won't choke on your popcorn.
I provided the link before. Did you miss it? Intentionally? The banks cleaned up under obama. The fact that they got screwed on that one deal is supposed to negate that they had massive profits in the first two years under his admin? In what bizarre world?
If you're not choking yet, maybe you could explain to me how huge profits equates with the banks hating obama. I'm not surprised that the word gymnastics was on your mind. Seeing as how that's what you're trying to perform.
Maybe you'd like to also add how the health insurance industry he regulated hates him, too...
Profits are booming at health insurance companies - Axios
https://www.axios.com/profits-are-booming-at-health-insurance-companies-24181947...
May 24, 2017
Like I said. I see health insurance industry speaking fees in his future.
I'm not a frog jumping from lilly-pads so you can say gotachI'd assume a gala is really a fundraiser? So if they are losing money that would be odd.
I'm browsing https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=16680
Of course I need to check charitynavigator's reputation itself but as the CF is a public charity it is probably all pretty transparent in the IRS.
Here is a hint - the Clinton Foundation spent $23,544,381 on the Clinton Global Initiative whose sole purpose is to host the Gala meetings that serve as PR vehicles for well-known attendees.
The next two top spending areas are the Clinton Climate Initiative at $8,293,416, and the Clinton Development Initiative at $4,482,714.
Bill Clinton’s $300 Million Birthday Gift!
(Click on picture to go to article)
Clinton Foundation tax return in 2013:
"... the foundation's 2013 tax returns, which revealed that the Clinton Foundation raised over $140 million but only used $9 million in direct aid, according to the New York Post:
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.
In all, the group reported $84.6 million in “functional expenses” on its 2013 tax return and had more than $64 million left over — money the organization has said represents pledges rather than actual cash on hand."
http://www.dailywire.com/news/8561/7-things-you-need-know-about-clinton-foundation-aaron-bandler#
To break that down in rough terms, of the 140 million they raised, they only had about 80 million of it in the first place because the rest represented pledges, according to the article. And aside from that 9 million that went directly to charity, most all the rest went to expenses that do not look very much at all like 'their own charitable endeavors.".
Going to conferences and meetings? Yeah, that's the kind of thing I presume they're counting as their own charity work. Anybody got a different explanation?
"... the foundation's 2013 tax returns, which revealed that the Clinton Foundation raised over $140 million but only used $9 million in direct aid, according to the New York Post:
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.
In all, the group reported $84.6 million in “functional expenses” on its 2013 tax return and had more than $64 million left over — money the organization has said represents pledges rather than actual cash on hand."
http://www.dailywire.com/news/8561/7-things-you-need-know-about-clinton-foundation-aaron-bandler#
To break that down in rough terms, of the 140 million they raised, they only had about 80 million of it in the first place because the rest represented pledges, according to the article. And aside from that 9 million that went directly to charity, most all the rest went to expenses that do not look very much at all like 'their own charitable endeavors.".
Going to conferences and meetings? Yeah, that's the kind of thing I presume they're counting as their own charity work. Anybody got a different explanation?
The clinton foundation is just an ATM for the clintons, and their underling saprophytes who are trying to pick up scraps from the clinton's daily kill.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/27/...ary-clinton-foundation-wikileaks.html?mcubz=1
Well you certainly didn't disappoint. You apparently can believe that Obama "retained working control" of the banks while they "ran the place", who knew? The psychology of that is fascinating, apparently you can have this overarching meaning in your life, in your case "Obama bad" and hold any number of directly conflicting views as long as they all support that bedrock belief.
Presumably you and people like you trade, there's gotta be an edge exploiting this predictable irrationality on the part of people like you. Thanks for giving me a brief glimpse inside your thought process, fascinating stuff.
Ok, where is that figure from? We can check that if you can show the source?
I think that gala party would be seen from space considering the total money raised annually
https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=16680
Shows Fundraising Events 3.3% or $9.1 million in 2015, the gala should be part of that.
So the Clinton Foundation filings are not truthful. This is the Foundation's statement on its spending.