It's not looking too hot for the first orange president

[prime]

The Clintons are not model citizens. They have been mired in scandals for as long as I can remember all the way back to Troopergate. To think otherwise that they are honest and upstanding is pure delusional thinking. The foundation has come crashing to a halt on donations after she lost so please don't imply that it was a charity based on philanthropy and helping the poor and destitute. I hate politics and I am neither Democrat or Republican but one thing for sure is that I've watched the rise of Clintons for last 30 years all the way from their beginnings from Arkansas before the news outlets became propaganda machines for political leaders. I'd rather vote for an Orangutan before I'd ever vote for a Clinton. Laundering isn't always about hiding the source but making the source legitimate and legal. That's what the foundation was for. We all knew where the sources were from. A large majority was from Islamic states.

 

[tommyguns2]

You can dislike the Clintons as much as u want but the truth is their foundation like many other foundations backed by wealthy individuals does great work in their respective communities....

Like Haiti?

What has the Clinton Foundation done for Harlem?

I've got to give Bill and Hillary credit. How else could a couple that have worked in the public sector almost their entire lives amassed a personal fortune that is presently estimated at well over $150 million? LOL Who knew that feeding poor kids could be so lucrative?

 

[FlyingDragon]

Like Haiti?

What has the Clinton Foundation done for Harlem?

I've got to give Bill and Hillary credit. How else could a couple that have worked in the public sector almost their entire lives amassed a personal fortune that is presently estimated at well over $150 million? LOL Who knew that feeding poor kids could be so lucrative?

Books, speeches....

The Foundation is not where they made their wealth....

 

[HGH]

Like Haiti?

What has the Clinton Foundation done for Harlem?

I've got to give Bill and Hillary credit. How else could a couple that have worked in the public sector almost their entire lives amassed a personal fortune that is presently estimated at well over $150 million? LOL Who knew that feeding poor kids could be so lucrative?

what FlyingDragon said. unlike trump, THEIR SOURCES OF WEALTH ARE MADE PUBLIC IN THEIR TAX RETURNS. feel free to set up an inquiry into their validity, but i guarantee dozens of high-level republicans have already done that.

there is no story there.

Trump, on the other hand...

 

[IronInsanity]

I give Trump a 9/10 so far. And nothing rhymes with orange.

 

[FlyingDragon]

I give Trump a 9/10 so far. And nothing rhymes with orange.

I bet Snoop Dogg knows a few words.....

 

[FlyingDragon]

what FlyingDragon said. unlike trump, THEIR SOURCES OF WEALTH ARE MADE PUBLIC IN THEIR TAX RETURNS. feel free to set up an inquiry into their validity, but i guarantee dozens of high-level republicans have already done that.

there is no story there.

Trump, on the other hand...

Bush makes money on speeches at least to those who want to listen to him....Obama will make a ton on speeches, books, maybe even a movie with Arnold....And so have many others who leave politics including members of Congress....Since when is it against the law to make money after being in politics?

 

[tommyguns2]

Politicians make money on speeches because they are perceived to have the influence necessary to "move the needle" on legislation or policy that will have an economic effect on the well-being of those contributing. Whether an R or a D, it doesn't matter.

The simple fact that politicians can make outrageous sums of money selling their influence is itself validation for my contention that the government is too big, and plays too large a role in our lives. If it didn't no one would perceive it worthwhile to give a politician a big chunk of money to give a speech.

Bill/Hillary got large speech fees in return for their influence on behalf of whatever interest was paying. One clear example was the uranium deal.

It's sad, quite frankly.

 

[Yomo]

I give Trump a 9/10 so far. And nothing rhymes with orange.

car hinge, bar binge = 2/10 for Trump

 

[HGH]

Politicians make money on speeches because they are perceived to have the influence necessary to "move the needle" on legislation or policy that will have an economic effect on the well-being of those contributing. Whether an R or a D, it doesn't matter.

The simple fact that politicians can make outrageous sums of money selling their influence is itself validation for my contention that the government is too big, and plays too large a role in our lives. If it didn't no one would perceive it worthwhile to give a politician a big chunk of money to give a speech.

Bill/Hillary got large speech fees in return for their influence on behalf of whatever interest was paying. One clear example was the uranium deal.

It's sad, quite frankly.

that's not how that works.

clinton/obama/bush get huge speaking fees, just like celebrities do, because they are celebrities, and their very presence at an event adds validity to an organization.

if they were advertising influence THEY would be the one paying to speak. welcome to logic.

 

[Swiper]

none of your opinions on Clinton are based in fact.

Trumps foundation is corrupt. The Clinton Foundation is a well-regarded top notch charity. You'll find zero evidence otherwise outside of mega-conservative talking heads on fox news or breitbart blogs.

"Just 5.7 percent of the Clinton Foundation’s massive 2014 budget actually went to charitable grants, according to the tax-exempt organization’s IRS filings. The rest went to salaries and employee benefits, fundraising and “other expenses.”

The Clinton Foundation spent a hair under $91.3 million in 2014, the organization’s IRS filings show. But less than $5.2 million of that went to charitable grants."

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.dail...n-foundation-budget-actually-went-to-charity/

 

[HGH]

"Just 5.7 percent of the Clinton Foundation’s massive 2014 budget actually went to charitable grants, according to the tax-exempt organization’s IRS filings. The rest went to salaries and employee benefits, fundraising and “other expenses.”

The Clinton Foundation spent a hair under $91.3 million in 2014, the organization’s IRS filings show. But less than $5.2 million of that went to charitable grants."

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.dail...n-foundation-budget-actually-went-to-charity/

instead of your conservative blog source try a real one:

https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=16680