What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Donald Trump for President thread (2 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
In 2014, Hillary and Bill made over $28 million.  They gave away a grand total of $22,500 to charities not named the Clinton Foundation.  They are disgusting greedy people, just like Trump.  Neither should be President and anyone voting for them that believe the ends justify the means should wake up.  Hillary nor Trump deserve to be President and its disgusting that they are the two options being presented.
Why would you exclude what they gave to their own foundation? How much did they give in 2014 total, including to/through their foundation?

 
Why would you exclude what they gave to their own foundation? How much did they give in 2014 total, including to/through their foundation?
They gave exactly $3,000,000 to their own foundation.

They receive a lot of personal benefit from their own foundation, including some elaborate travelling and having their daughter on the payroll.

 
I'm somewhat aware.  I dove into their financials several months ago.  It is not all that efficient actually.  In the year I looked at (at the time it was the most recent available) the biggest chunk of money was actually just filtered directly into a single different charity. Glancing at their latest report, that has changed.  95% of their program expenses now have "Clinton" at the front of the name.  There is also a boatload of money coming through there, over $330 million last year.  Difficult to account for all of it and what are substantial sums of money can easily be lost in the shuffle.

The numbers show they aren't really charitable people with their income at all and if they truly cared about poor people, they could give a lot more.  Like $10's of millions per year more and still be filthy stinking rich.  I give a higher % of my income away per year than they do and that's even including what they gave to The Clinton Foundation.

She's a greedy, power-hungry person.  So is Trump.  It's sickening.
Charity Watch gave the Clinton Foundation an A rating. Charity Navigator 4 out of 4 stars. i'll take their ratings over anyone's opinion.

 
Charity Watch gave the Clinton Foundation an A rating. Charity Navigator 4 out of 4 stars. i'll take their ratings over anyone's opinion.
I bet you also thought that Standard & Poors and Moody's rating services were trustworthy when rating the bundled mortgage backed securities too.

 
I'm somewhat aware.  I dove into their financials several months ago.  It is not all that efficient actually.  In the year I looked at (at the time it was the most recent available) the biggest chunk of money was actually just filtered directly into a single different charity. Glancing at their latest report, that has changed.  95% of their program expenses now have "Clinton" at the front of the name.  There is also a boatload of money coming through there, over $330 million last year.  Difficult to account for all of it and what are substantial sums of money can easily be lost in the shuffle.

The numbers show they aren't really charitable people with their income at all and if they truly cared about poor people, they could give a lot more.  Like $10's of millions per year more and still be filthy stinking rich.  I give a higher % of my income away per year than they do and that's even including what they gave to The Clinton Foundation.

She's a greedy, power-hungry person.  So is Trump.  It's sickening.
This Clintons donated 23 million between 2001 and 2015, about 10% of their adjusted gross income. 

That's the percentage the baby Jesus tells us to give, I remember from vacation bible school.

Sickening.  Just sickening.

 
They gave exactly $3,000,000 to their own foundation.

They receive a lot of personal benefit from their own foundation, including some elaborate travelling and having their daughter on the payroll.
So, if their income that year was $28M that means they gave over 10%, which is a lot more than most give. The foundations admin expenses are low so even if they're traveling elaborately and Chelsea is on the payroll it's inconsequential.

 
This Clintons donated 23 million between 2001 and 2015, about 10% of their adjusted gross income. 

That's the percentage the baby Jesus tells us to give, I remember from vacation bible school.

Sickening.  Just sickening.
But they didn't donate it to who or how Jayrod thinks they should. And they had the audacity to have their daughter (you know, a Clinton by birth) actually work for the Clinton charity foundation. So, so, crooked!

 
I bet you also thought that Standard & Poors and Moody's rating services were trustworthy when rating the bundled mortgage backed securities too.
Nice deflection. :lol: Charity Nav is well respected and I'll take their ratings over anyone's opinion any day. Especially one with an apparent axe to grind.

 
When 95% of your giving is to a charity you run and are personally benefitted by, it's not really charitable giving.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, if their income that year was $28M that means they gave over 10%, which is a lot more than most give. The foundations admin expenses are low so even if they're traveling elaborately and Chelsea is on the payroll it's inconsequential.
This is a relative number.  You are likely looking at the %, but 25% of $330 million is vastly higher than 25% of most charities budgets.

 
When 95% of your giving is to a charity you run and are personally benefitted, it's not really charitable giving.

But whatever, vote for the saint.  I'm sure all of our lives will be better with government run healthcare and increasing taxes.
Yeah, that's a bull #### talking point from the right, and is untrue.

Their money goes to their foundation, and that foundation didn't spend a huge amount on other charities, because they are actually doing the boots on the ground work themselves, like getting AIDS medication and other vital drugs to the third world.

Maybe next time Carly Fiorina tells you something, Google it yourself:

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/

Clinton isn't a saint, but don't be a sucker, their foundation has done massive amounts of good.

 
This is a relative number.  You are likely looking at the %, but 25% of $330 million is vastly higher than 25% of most charities budgets.
Maybe you should actually look at Charity Nav data and rating. Not sure what else to tell you.


 


Program Expenses
(Percent of the charity’s total expenses spent on the programs
and services it delivers)



86.9%

Program Expenses:

This measure reflects the percent of its total expenses a charity spends on the programs and services it exists to deliver. Dividing a charity's average program expenses by its average total functional expenses yields this percentage. We calculate the charity's average expenses over its three most recent fiscal years*. 

*Explanation of 3 year averaging: 42 months is used in order to capture data from a third 990 in the event of a fiscal year change. We use the most recent IRS Form 990 and then include all full year 990s within the 30 months preceding it. This will usually result in three 990s, except in cases of fiscal year changes that are more than six months, if a 990 was not filed, or if an EZ 990 was filed. We do not use partial year 990s in our evaluation.

 
What about you?
I don't attend church, so $0 there.  I do give approximately 5% of my income to the National Hemophilia Foundation which is somewhat self-serving since my son has the disease, but I guess that's what drives most of us to donate to specific things.  

I figured you'd try to dodge the question, but answered it for me anyway.  Thanks. 

 
Yeah, that's a bull #### talking point from the right, and is untrue.

Their money goes to their foundation, and that foundation didn't spend a huge amount on other charities, because they are actually doing the boots on the ground work themselves, like getting AIDS medication and other vital drugs to the third world.

Maybe next time Carly Fiorina tells you something, Google it yourself:

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/

Clinton isn't a saint, but don't be a sucker, their foundation has done massive amounts of good.
I never listen to anything from "the right".  These are conclusions I've reached on my own by looking through the tax returns and charity's financial statements.

Again, that year in question was several years ago, I'm sure they've improved since then based on the heat they took over it.

I couldn't even tell you who Carly Fiorina is.

 
I'm sure they've done some good with their foundation.  It would be too easy to burn her to the ground if they didn't.  Even mob fronts do some legitimate business.

 
I never listen to anything from "the right".  These are conclusions I've reached on my own by looking through the tax returns and charity's financial statements.

Again, that year in question was several years ago, I'm sure they've improved since then based on the heat they took over it.

I couldn't even tell you who Carly Fiorina is.
You're trying to convince someone based on outdated info?

 
Yeah, that's a bull #### talking point from the right, and is untrue.

Their money goes to their foundation, and that foundation didn't spend a huge amount on other charities, because they are actually doing the boots on the ground work themselves, like getting AIDS medication and other vital drugs to the third world.

Maybe next time Carly Fiorina tells you something, Google it yourself:

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/

Clinton isn't a saint, but don't be a sucker, their foundation has done massive amounts of good.
I'm just interested in this issue, so I just invite others to look at it.

Go to Hillary's Foundation's site and pick any project from the last 5 years.

What did they do?

I'm not being cynical or sarcastic or attacking, I'm just saying pick a random project from the last 5 or so years from the Foundation's own site and see what it actually entailed. It's largely not a 'boots on the ground' organization IMO.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jayrod said:
They gave exactly $3,000,000 to their own foundation.

They receive a lot of personal benefit from their own foundation, including some elaborate travelling and having their daughter on the payroll.
That makes them smart. 

 
At that point in the audio, Trump and Bush appear to notice Arianne Zucker, the actress who is waiting to escort them into the soap opera set.

“Your girl’s hot as ####, in the purple,” says Bush, who’s now a co-host of NBC’s “Today” show.

“Whoa!” Trump says. “Whoa!”

“I’ve gotta use some tic tacs, just in case I start kissing her,” Trump says.“You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful -- I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait.”

“And when you’re a star they let you do it,” Trump says. “You can do anything.”

“Whatever you want,” says another voice, apparently Bush’s.

“Grab them by the #####,” Trump says. “You can do anything.”
Link.

"Grab them by the #####"  :lmao:

Edit: This was 8 months after he had bought married Melania

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It always befuddled me when anti-Hilldog folks point to her foundation as an example of her crookedness.  I looked and the foundation gets good marks for use of contributions, and if Saudi Arabia contributed, so what?  What kind of benefit does that really buy them?  Is the foundation some kind of personal ATM for the Clinton's and I'm just to dumb to see it?

 
In a prepared statement, Trump said "This was locker room banter...Bill Clinton has said far worse to me on the golf course." 
But Clinton hasn't been caught saying any of it on tape yet. That makes Clinton smart.

His campaign staff must love this. Couple of days before the debate and now this. Wonder if there'll be any mention of it at the town hall...

 
Who thought Trump didn't talk like that?

If going to bring up Bill should've just said Bill banged fat Monica, what's the big deal. 

 
Bucky86 said:


In a speech in Cleveland three months before Republicans gathered there to nominate Trump, Zeid said: "Less than 150 miles away from where I speak, a front-running candidate to be president of this country declared, just a few months ago, his enthusiastic support for torture." Zeid was referring to a speech Trump gave in Ohio in November promising to restore waterboarding and introduce even harsher interrogation methods for suspected terrorists.

"In what may be a crucial election for leadership of this country later this year, we have seen a full-frontal attack — disguised as courageous taboo-busting — on some fundamental, hard-won tenets of decency and social cohesion that have come to be accepted by American society," Zeid said.


- UN Commissioner for Human Rights.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top