It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Where is the Clinton Foundation Tax Returns?

page: 3
19
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 02:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I'd like to know where the missing 6 billion dollars is from the state department...


Jiminy criminy! Hillary said this was debunked in the debate, dontcha know?


"Some have concluded based on this that $6 billion is missing. The alert, however, did not draw that conclusion," he wrote. "Instead, it found that the failure to adequately maintain contract files — documents necessary to ensure the full accounting of U.S. tax dollars — ‘creates significant financial risk and demonstrates a lack of internal control over the Department’s contract actions.’ "

In other words, the State Department was terrible at paperwork. The $6 billion figure refers to the total amount affected by file mismanagement. It’s akin to spending $20 on lunch and losing or not asking for a receipt. Documentation over where that $20 went was lost, but not the $20 itself.


Beautiful, precious Politifact


Duh. There's just no receipt or record of how that $6 billion was spent and that definitely means it's not "missing." It was totes spent gorgeously on things we really need. That should be self-evident!

It's a shame that Trump couldn't articulate the words, "$6 billion was unaccounted for."




posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

Um. The report does not say that $6 billion was lost. Trump, like many, was easily fooled.


Lost, mislaid, fiddled, fraud, stolen? briefly from the begining of the link:


DEBATE FACT CHECK ...Trump is right, Hillarys State Department lost
$6 billion. The report centered on the State Department contracts worth more
than $6 billion in which contract files were incomplete, or could not be located
at all.

The situation creates conditions conducive to fraudas corrupt individuals
may attempt to conceal evidence of illicit behavior by omitting key documents
from the contract file


Seems pretty clear to me ....

Here's the rest truthfeed.com...



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: eletheia


Seems pretty clear to me ....

The contracts in which filing (and other) discrepancies were found were worth $6 billion. That somehow gets translated into $6 billion missing.



Here's the rest truthfeed.com...

Here's the report:
oig.state.gov...


edit on 10/22/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 03:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

Jiminy criminy! Hillary said this was debunked in the debate, dontcha know?



If she is the liar that many people believe, Why would you even believe

anything she says? It seems she has covered her tracks by loosing a vast

quantity of e.mails, or should I say erasing them as i believe things out

there can always be brought back.



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

The contracts in which filing (and other) discrepancies were found were worth $6 billion. That somehow gets translated into $6 billion missing.


Discrepancy = unaccounted for? I presume it is money from hard working American

tax payers?

I hope the hard pressed US taxpayers are all livid and vote in a more reputable State dept.



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 03:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia
If she is the liar that many people believe, Why would you even believe

anything she says?



I don't. I wasn't obvious enough with my snark?

I tried to lay it on so thick though.



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 03:45 PM
link   
a reply to: eletheia




Discrepancy = unaccounted for?
No. Discrepancies like bidding "improprieties". You could always read the report, you know.


I hope the hard pressed US taxpayers are all livid and vote in a more reputable State dept.
US taxpayers do not vote for their bureaucrats.

edit on 10/22/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Phage, you seem to be seeking excuses for Hillary at every opportunity whilst at the same time jumping to negative conclusions about Trump.
Your head is not in gear. I don't really blame you for that as its such a divided election, but I must say it's totally different to your normal approach!
edit on 22/10/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth
You think separating fact from fabrication is an excuse?

Regarding Trump, there are few facts available. Particularly when it comes to his finances.


edit on 10/22/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2016 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I look at it as more an intentional dodge, one that allows money to flow out without solid connection or tracking in order to obfuscate the direction of favors to foreign governments and corporations, while masking the intent behind kickbacks, errr I mean donations lol, making those kickbacks to the Clinton Foundation appear somehow legitimate.

Cheers - Dave
edit on 10/22.2016 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Hey Phage, stop trying to go off on a tangent, yet again. We know the Clinton foundation is being used as a front for the Clintons to received millions of dollars in exchange for political favors. We know, thanks to the wikileaks which you among others want to dismiss, that Hillary Clinton specifically has received millions of dollars from foreign governments as well. She claims that Trump is in the pockets of the Russians but shows no proof.

edit on 23-10-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse




Hey Phage, stop trying to go off tangent, yet again.

Hey EU, what does "off tangent" mean?

You asked "Where is the Clinton Foundation Tax Returns." They were provided. There was misinformation being spread about those returns, I corrected it.


edit on 10/23/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

Hey EU, what does "off tangent" mean?

You asked "Where is the Clinton Foundation Tax Returns." They were provided. There was misinformation being spread about those returns, I corrected it.



Yet we don't see who gave them that money do we Phage? BTW, yeah I should have written "don't go off on a tangent". It is no secret that English is not my first, nor second language, but we know you progressives love to claim to be pro-foreigners but only when those foreigners agree with your delusions.

Did I just ask in the op about tax returns without any context as to what that money was used on?... No, I included some of the wikileaks evidence posted on another thread which points to the Clinton foundation laundering money by trying to make it look like a legit charitable foundation. The wikileaks do show that the Clintons got millions for political favors including to foreign governments and laundered that money through their foundation.

It is called making an argument within context.


edit on 23-10-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse




Yet we don't see who gave them that money do we Phage?

Apparently you did not bother to look at the 990s, even though you asked for them.
You know that non-profit tax returns are public, right?







 
19
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join