Clinton Foundation vs. Clinton Campaign ???

Seeing as how Hillary Clinton (and Bill) use the Clinton Foundation as a means to hide their staggering, ill-gotten, wealth and avoid taxes (like all the rest of America has to pay) (i.e. a tax shelter), I wonder how many tens of MILLIONS are being siphoned off of the "charitable" Clinton Foundation to fund Hillary's presidential campaign???

I doubt we'll ever find out because she'll LIE about that just like everything else that comes out of her head, but we all should be asking this question...HOW MUCH...is the "charity" Clinton Foundation being BILKED for so Hillary can run for president???

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

There are strict rules on campaign finance that requires a paper trail of all money. If money was being funneled from the CF to the campaign, you would be able to find the appropriate documents.

Have you found those documents?

a reply to: introvert

You're kidding, right??? Like those documents are going to be accurate and truthful??? Surely you jest!

The CF is already under investigation for failure to disclose all sorts of things, why would this be any different?

In answer to your question; NO, I have not been able to find those documents. Can you?

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

There are strict rules on campaign finance that requires a paper trail of all money. If money was being funneled from the CF to the campaign, you would be able to find the appropriate documents.

Have you found those documents?

There are rules about the transmission of classified materials too.

a reply to: butcherguy

Yeah, and that sure as hell didn't seem to mean one iota to her!

Campaign finance is 10,000x more loosely governed!

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
I wonder how many tens of MILLIONS are being siphoned off

Didn't 'The Foundation' pay Chelsea Clinton 26 Million Dollars for 90 days worth of work?

Laughable.

But, when you control 2 Billion Dollars, you operate under a completely different set of rules. The kind of rules you make up as you go along.

Isn't that what everyone complains about when the subject of Hillary comes up?

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

You're kidding, right??? Like those documents are going to be accurate and truthful??? Surely you jest!

Yes. They would have to be accurate or there would be some serious issues for the Clintons.

The CF is already under investigation for failure to disclose all sorts of things, why would this be any different?

Are they?

In answer to your question; NO, I have not been able to find those documents. Can you?

No. I have not. Unless you have some sort of evidence, why would you assume they are funneling money?

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

There are strict rules on campaign finance that requires a paper trail of all money. If money was being funneled from the CF to the campaign, you would be able to find the appropriate documents.

Have you found those documents?

You really make me laugh. Shifting money through multiple banks and using bag men to carry bearer bonds is not a big deal. To manipulate IBC's into untraceable funding sources, again, not a big deal. Do you have any idea how trusts and blind trusts work or can work to throw the investigators off the trail? I doubt it. Plus there are loopholes in everything. I had a managing director of a military contracting company, that was real estate rich but cash strapped. I found the loophole in tax rules concerning foreign investment and offshore payments. Told him how to set up his transfers through three banks and one US based company. He made 16 million in 4 months before the reserve bank closed the loophole.

If there is a method, the Clintons will find it, illegal or otherwise.

Cheers - Dave

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

There are strict rules on campaign finance that requires a paper trail of all money. If money was being funneled from the CF to the campaign, you would be able to find the appropriate documents.

Have you found those documents?

There are rules about the transmission of classified materials too.

And there was a "paper trail" behind that. Where is the paper trail, or discrepancies in the total campaign fund amount, that suggests this is occurring?

Also, why would Clinton need to take money from the Foundation to fund the campaign? She has plenty of money.

a reply to: bobs_uruncle

Again, she has plenty of money and wealthy interests behind her. Why does she need to use Foundation money?

If you can't provide some sort of evidence, it appears you guys are just pulling a silly conspiracy out of your asses.

Because we know evil when we see evil. Most humans have this ability.

a reply to: introvert

There are strict rules for Foundation too. It sounds like the Clinton's are not following them.

Charles Ortel, a longtime financial adviser, said he has spent the past 15 months digging into the Clinton Foundation’s public records, federal and state-level tax filings, and donor disclosures. That includes records from the foundation’s many offshoots—including the Clinton Health Access Initiative and the Clinton Global Initiative—as well as its foreign subsidiaries.


“Starting almost 20 years ago in 1997, the Clinton Foundation spread its activities from Little Rock, Arkansas, to all U.S. states and to numerous foreign countries without taking legally required steps to function and solicit as a duly constituted public charity,”

I pulled the first link to the story, if you don't like it, feel free to do your own research on it. Someone posted an interview That John B Wells did with Ortel on this site a couple of days ago. Ortel can explain this better then I.


newsbusters.org...

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I wonder how many tens of MILLIONS are being siphoned off of the "charitable" Clinton Foundation to fund Hillary's presidential campaign???

A classic case of "I was wondering something and I wish it to be true, so I'll pretend it is true, even though I have no evidence, and then I'll say it is true, and make other people prove it is true. Untill they prove it is true, I'll say it is true, and even though I have no evidence that it is true, it is still true."

You bring the claim, you bring the evidence. Otherwise, this is a non-starter.

I am not voting for Clinton, so don't try to strawman me with a diversionary tactic. If you find the evidence, I'll bring the bullhorns (I have three), and we can both shout it from the mountain.

Otherwise, this is just conjecture that is being passed off as fact. It does not help that you are making a conspiracy of silence about the evidence. But once again, if you find something, come let me know.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I'm wondering how much reason and sanity has been bilked from people that support her at all. She should be sitting in the docket along side other Nazis at Nuremberg.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

There are strict rules on campaign finance that requires a paper trail of all money. If money was being funneled from the CF to the campaign, you would be able to find the appropriate documents.

Have you found those documents?

There are rules about the transmission of classified materials too.

And there was a "paper trail" behind that. Where is the paper trail, or discrepancies in the total campaign fund amount, that suggests this is occurring?

Also, why would Clinton need to take money from the Foundation to fund the campaign? She has plenty of money.

The fact that Hillary and Bill Clinton are involved suggests that it is occurring.

a reply to: butcherguy

remember when Comey was asked if the Clinton Foundation was under investigation during his testimony? His reply was something along the lines of " I can not comment on any investigation that may or may not exist" then when asked if any of the emails that were scrubbed from her server were related to the Clinton Foundation he said something along the lines of " Again, I can not comment on that" So it would seem maybe this could be a possibility

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

Again, she has plenty of money and wealthy interests behind her. Why does she need to use Foundation money?

If you can't provide some sort of evidence, it appears you guys are just pulling a silly conspiracy out of your asses.

It's called speculation, the OP was framed as a question. Since it would be something fairly easily done, shifting money around ro provide illegal campaign contributions, it seems a very valid question. Considering Hillary and bill's proclivity for all things illegal, immoral and unethical, it further cements the validity of the questions.

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: bobs_uruncle

Considering Hillary and bill's proclivity for all things illegal, immoral and unethical, it further cements the validity of the questions

Utter nonsense. The entire premise of the thread is rooted in hatred for the Clintons. Once you actually think about it and realize that the campaign does not need the Foundation money, it does not pass the initial common sense test.

Why would the Clintons bother to shift money illegally when the campaign doesn't even need it?

C'mon guys. This isn't rocket science.

a reply to: olbe66

What difference, at this point, does it make?

the clintons do lots of things that dont make much sense....selling missile guidance tech to the chinese, renting the Lincoln bedroom, selling uranium mining rights to the Russians. They have been involved in pay to play schemes for over 30 years. I would put nothing past those two thugs.