Clinton Foundation #FailedTaxAudit Forces them to Refile Tax returns and Audit for Errors

a reply to: burntheships

People serve jail time for as much, or less.

Really?
Well, I guess I'd better be careful when I inquire who the estimator for a subcontractor is. I might end up in jail.

a reply to: Phage

Seems like maybe she shouldn't have granted this favor:

2) Based on their SEC filing[4] The investment bankers that Neptune has used (paying $388,150 in commissions to) in the past have highly questionable histories and numerous allegations of fraud according to their FINRA reports[5] (which you can find yourself)

seekingalpha.com



A little more about them:

We believe that Neptune Minerals, Inc. – founded by John Morris, co - founder and former CEO of OMEX–is also worthless and is simply a reincarnation of Neptune Minerals, Plc, a failed public company in the UK which John Morris acquired for $140,000 in 2011.

Scribd A lot of questions surrounding this company that Hillary's son-in-law helped promote.

originally posted by: Phage

Really?
Well, I guess I'd better be careful when I inquire who the estimator for a subcontractor is. I might end up in jail.

You could, but depends on who you know...apparently

Ordinary folks must avoid even an appearance of a conflict of interest.
Federal regulations prohibit use of nonpublic information to further any private
interest. Even the mere perception of a conflict of interest is unacceptable.

www.oge.gov...

5.1M in charitable grants paid... 50M for "other" expenses.

Slush Fund.

a reply to: burntheships

Can you point out the part that says it's illegal to ask for a contact name?

a reply to: Konduit

5.1M in charitable grants paid... 50M for "other" expenses.

Yes, that 50 million includes costs of internal programs but not amounts paid to other charities.
You can find the details if you look just a little bit deeper.

a reply to: Phage

B-but didn't CNN say that Trump should release his tax return because it tells us a lot more than any other financial records could? I'm so confused.

a reply to: Konduit

B-but didn't CNN say that Trump should release his tax return because it tells us a lot more than any other financial records could? I'm so confused.

For the Clinton Foundation you have both. Now go read them. They work together. It might help your confusion.

a reply to: Phage

It would be illegal to ask for anything from anyone who knows
anything on the "inside", even if this information is available
to the public.

a reply to: burntheships
Anything at all? We cannot talk to anyone in government about anything?
That sucks.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Right....So they are filing a corrected return..BFD.

Now the Trump Foundation has never had a license to operate in NYC. Trump has used the charity funds to buy paintings on himself, settle personal lawsuits, buy sports memorabilia and pay-off the FL AG to drop a lawsuit against his fraud university...all the while illegally funneling business revenues to the foundation.

If you are upset about the Clinton Foundation having errors on it's 990...the you must SHOCKED and OUTRAGED over the Trump foundation?....Right?

Right?....Buhler??

originally posted by: Konduit

5.1M in charitable grants paid... 50M for "other" expenses.

Slush Fund.

Holy Crap...You have to know this has been debunked Ad Nuaseum?

They are an OPERATING charity...They administer there own programs...Grants are unusal for them...

They have an A+ rating from charity watch and spend 88% on Programs and 12% on fund-raising and administration expenses.

Politifact:

"In practical terms, this means both that it relies heavily on donations from the public and that it achieves its mission primarily by using those donations to conduct direct charitable activities, as opposed to providing grants from an endowment.

"Failure to understand the difference led to the widespread claim (covered by the New York Post, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, and others) that only a small portion of Clinton Foundation spending goes toward charity.

www.politifact.com...

Charity Watch:
www.charitywatch.org...

a reply to: Indigo5way i see it money comes in then goes out with little to no records of where or what it is being spent on . well if i did that especially taking in millions from foreign powers that would get me in trouble for money laundering. that is why alot of foundations have the monies they collect go into an endowment fund and give out grants so there is a more clear picture of where the money comes from and who it goes to. i know that both these fondations are just ways to hide wealth and the least to get around that inheritance tax hillary keeps hawking about at worst they are slush funds and money laundering schemes .

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: Indigo5way i see it money comes in then goes out with little to no records of where or what it is being spent on . well if i did that especially taking in millions from foreign powers that would get me in trouble for money laundering. that is why alot of foundations have the monies they collect go into an endowment fund and give out grants so there is a more clear picture of where the money comes from and who it goes to. i know that both these fondations are just ways to hide wealth and the least to get around that inheritance tax hillary keeps hawking about at worst they are slush funds and money laundering schemes .

FACTS: its been debunked.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: DAVID64
a reply to: reldra

Let's take a look at some of the Clinton Foundation "charity"

clinton.news...

www.thenation.com...

Structurally unsafe and laced with formaldehyde, the "hurricane-proof" classroom trailers installed by the Clinton Foundation in Haiti came from the same company being sued for sickening Hurricane Katrina victims.

www.nationalreview.com...

Clinton Foundation Demanded $500K from School-Building Charity for Bill’s Appearance Read more at: www.nationalreview.com...

That is just the tip of a very large iceberg.

There are complaints. This is global and employs 2,000 people. It is a real foundation that really helps. It has a good grade from bipartisan groups that rate charities. Trump's, not so much.

In comparing the 2, there is no comparison. One is a real foundation and the other is not.

And that is exactly how they want it to look, and what they want you to think.

I believe the term is, "Useful Idiot"?

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: Indigo5way i see it money comes in then goes out with little to no records of where or what it is being spent on .

Correct for the "Trump Foundation"...where Trump famously responded "I don't have to show you that!" when a reporter asked if he would make the accounting public.

Not correct for the Clinton Initiative, which publicly discloses it's finances and records annually.

that is why alot of foundations have the monies they collect go into an endowment fund and give out grants so there is a more clear picture of where the money comes from and who it goes to.

The opposite...When one foundation writes a check to another charity they lose full visibility and transparency on how much of that money will actually be spent on services vs. administration costs etc.

i know that both these fondations are just ways to hide wealth and the least to get around that inheritance tax hillary keeps hawking about at worst they are slush funds and money laundering schemes .

Despite having raked over all the finances, records and tax returns...no one has found any way in which Hillary Clinton profits from the Clinton Foundation.

The Trump Foundation however is an unlicensed shell corp that Trump has routed revenues through and used to settle lawsuits against his businesses.

as Cronkite used to say "You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts"

a reply to: Indigo5

Actually the Clinton Foundation has accepted large donations by leaders / countries and in exchange got access to Clinton while she was Secstate.

Hence pay to play.