Revealed! Clinton gave ZERO to veterans’ charities?

Looks like the Hillary efforts to smear Trump about those donations to Veterans groups might be backfiring.

A story is claiming she hasn't given anything since 2012, and between 2006 and 2012, around $105,000 was donated to Veterans.

Could it be she thought nobody would check out her stories?

I guess many people just automatically believe what ever she says.


Revealed! Clinton gave ZERO to veterans’ charities

After months of being on the defensive, Hillary Clinton thought she had found the perfect way to break Donald Trump’s connection with the voters: accuse him of lying about his multi-million dollar donation to veterans’ charities.

She went all out this week, hiring more than a dozen veterans to protest outside Trump Tower and demanding the media press Trump about whether he ever donated the proceeds of his January 28 fundraiser in Iowa to vets.

But the attack ricocheted.

a reply to: xuenchen

I think the real issue is how Donald Trump uses charitable contributions as publicity stunts. Also this incorrect:

The only thing it exposed is the fact that Donald Trump gave more than 50 times as much money to America’s fighting men and women in one night than Hillary Clinton did in eight years.

No, he didn't. 80% of that came from other people. It's interesting that the author attributes those donations to Trump in much the same way as Trump has done a few times in the last week. What would be interesting to see is what charitable donations show up in Trump's taxes — oh wait, we've got about as much chance of seeing those as the transcripts to Hillary's speeches.

I'm willing to bet he's not given one single dollar to any charity without a press conference.

a reply to: xuenchen

Ive been in 15 years and I've never met anyone in the military who supports her.

And we all know how much she hates us. After the sniper BS, she can go pound sand.

a reply to: xuenchen

Have no dog in their fight and can't stand either Trump or Clinton however


The Associated Press today found that of the nearly two dozen charities that responded to its survey, nearly half received checks dated May 24, the same day the Washington Post published a story that revealed that no veteran-oriented nonprofits had received money from Trump’s charity event.

bigstory.ap.org...

a reply to: ScepticScot

Could be the whole thing was planned and scripted.

But at least the money is going to who is supposed to be getting it.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: ScepticScot

Could be the whole thing was planned and scripted.

But at least the money is going to who is supposed to be getting it.

True and despite as I said not being any form of Trump fan I doubt there was an intention not to pay, rather more likely that his staff are overextended with the campaign and things start to slip.

a reply to: ScepticScot

That and it takes TIME to vet the organizations, getting all the paperwork from the IRS saying yes they are a legit organization

a reply to: xuenchen

Kind of contradictory isn't it. She gave $105,000.00 and she gave zero.

15 million in charitable donations in an eight year period. That greedy bitch.

www.theatlantic.com...

a reply to: ScepticScot

Excuses for trump. Pillory for Hillary.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

Kind of contradictory isn't it. She gave $105,000.00 and she gave zero.

15 million in charitable donations in an eight year period. That greedy bitch.

www.theatlantic.com...

Yup.

But your source says most of the Clinton "donations" went to the Clinton Foundation !!

As for charitable donations, the Clintons gave just under $15 million over the eight-year period, which is 10.8 percent of their total income. The vast majority of that — about $14.8 million — went through the Clinton Family Foundation, the vehicle the Clintons frequently use to make personal donations, and another $57,000 went to the Clinton Global Initiative. The Clintons' other donations were to the Nelson Mandela Foundation ($60,000), Humana Challenge ($46,000), the First Methodist United Church ($20,000), Exploring the Arts ($4,100), St. Stephen's Armenian Apostolic Church ($2,500) and the Hot Springs Class of '64, Bill Clinton's high school graduating class in Arkansas ($200).

Nothing like self-preserving your own charity is there.

originally posted by: HomerinNC
a reply to: ScepticScot

That and it takes TIME to vet the organizations, getting all the paperwork from the IRS saying yes they are a legit organization

That makes sense.

People don't realize the red tape involved.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

Kind of contradictory isn't it. She gave $105,000.00 and she gave zero.

15 million in charitable donations in an eight year period. That greedy bitch.

www.theatlantic.com...

It isn't really "charity" when it goes to your very own Super PAC or other political organizations. She is a monster and master of deception.

a reply to: Metallicus

Nor is it really charity when you're doing it for publicity either. Vote Bernie?

Obviously the military isn't important, ambassadors either.

Just saying.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: HomerinNC
a reply to: ScepticScot

That and it takes TIME to vet the organizations, getting all the paperwork from the IRS saying yes they are a legit organization

That makes sense.

People don't realize the red tape involved.

So why aren't you starting a thread on Trump making a very public proclamation about what he was going to personally give.................... then had to be pushed hard to actually give it? Why aren't you focussing on that? Doesn't that fit into your agenda? Did HC say she had given to specific veterans charities but she hadn't?

a reply to: uncommitted

So why aren't you starting a thread on Trump making a very public proclamation about what he was going to personally give.................... then had to be pushed hard to actually give it?

Ever try thinking past the fact that they had to push him and think about WHY they had to push him?

Just saying.

Hillary didn't give money but she provided job security for the armed forces by creating a complete mess in the Middle East.

a reply to: uncommitted

Other threads beat me to it !!

a reply to: theantediluvian

While I would agree that his charitable donations would likely be more for press than for heart-felt concern for the charity's topic, money to the charity is money to the charity.

That's like saying doctors that save lives only because they get a very good paycheck are doing less for the world because of their motivation. The end result is the same, and that's okay.

I'm not saying charitable donations always save lives, but I hope you deciphered my point in the analogy--motivation doesn't always matter to the bottom line.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Metallicus

Nor is it really charity when you're doing it for publicity either. Vote Bernie?

No, I won't vote Bernie.

And any giving of anything of your own accord and free will is charity, whether for publicity or not. Beats the forced taxation that the main political parties salivate over...Bernie included.