General Discussion

Triana

(22,666 posts) Mon Jun 27, 2016, 10:50 AM Jun 2016

130

Clinton Foundation gets 'A' rating for spending 88-89% of funds on charity [View all]

LINK: https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillary-chelsea-clinton-foundation/478

Other charities in the same category: https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillary-chelsea-clinton-foundation/478

Governance & Transparency Benchmarks: https://www.charitywatch.org/governance-and-transparency/bill-hillary-chelsea-clinton-foundation/478

Interesting article from FactCheck.org on Carly Fiorina's smears of Clinton Fdn: http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/

96 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Clinton Foundation gets 'A' rating for spending 88-89% of funds on charity [View all] Triana Jun 2016 OP

off to greatest, and waiting for the usual in 3. . . 2 . . . . 1. . niyad Jun 2016 #1

howziss? Gabi Hayes Jun 2016 #4

an obvious fraud is Donnie larkrake Jun 2016 #49

The planetary scale of the Clinton Global Initiative, Hortensis Jun 2016 #72

And of course Trump will immediately Twitter tavernier Jun 2016 #2

Great! mcar Jun 2016 #3

K&R!! Peacetrain Jun 2016 #5

Massive K & R for the dose of positive reality... Surya Gayatri Jun 2016 #6

K&R ismnotwasm Jun 2016 #7

Kick & highly Recommended! William769 Jun 2016 #8

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #9

Im sure the FBI will take that into consideration litlbilly Jun 2016 #10

The Clintons have had more lies told about them than any couple in the history of the world. MohRokTah Jun 2016 #11

The Clintons are the most honest people in politics: we know because lewebley3 Jun 2016 #26

But ... Are they really lies, if one really wants to believe it AND ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #29

remember all the political dramaists who would shake their heads sadly at the mention of the Clinton MariaThinks Jun 2016 #12

Thats pretty good OpEx for a charity. AtheistCrusader Jun 2016 #13

In all their decades in public life, the Clintons have striven to do good... Hekate Jun 2016 #14

+1000. n/t pnwmom Jun 2016 #19

Thanks. I see Post Removed chimed in, too. Whee. Hekate Jun 2016 #63

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #48

K & R SunSeeker Jun 2016 #15

Kick n/t Upthevibe Jun 2016 #16

That is an amazing percentage... tallahasseedem Jun 2016 #17

Thanks for fighting the RW lies with the facts! pnwmom Jun 2016 #18

K&R... spanone Jun 2016 #20

Yeah, I don't get all the smears against the Foundation obamanut2012 Jun 2016 #21

Easy target to create doubt NewJeffCT Jun 2016 #24

True; but more 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #31

Ageed: and this rating puts all the lies about the foundation to rest lewebley3 Jun 2016 #27

I doubt that's the case. Chicago1980 Jun 2016 #87

Not just Republicans. eom tarheelsunc Jun 2016 #94

K&R. Thank you, thank you so much for posting this! This is who the Clintons really are lunamagica Jun 2016 #22

Classy just so Classy .. k & R Tribalceltic Jun 2016 #23

That is part of the reason the right wing hates it so much liberal N proud Jun 2016 #25

They are in line with some of the best charities that keeps overhead very low Sheepshank Jun 2016 #28

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #30

What help did Peterson provide provide? ... Or, did you just make that up? 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #32

See the link attached. chapdrum Jun 2016 #36

Okay ... I read the page and saw that the Peterson Foundation gave money to CGI-America ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #39

There isn't a connection. chapdrum Jun 2016 #51

Oh ... so you DID make it up? ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #54

I made nothing up. chapdrum Jun 2016 #64

Yes you did ... you made up the lie that the Peterson Foundation help the Clinton Foundation ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #66

reliance on the Post hoc ergo prompter hoc fallacy to better reinforce a deeply treasured bias. LanternWaste Jun 2016 #57

The post was perfectly clear sulphurdunn Jun 2016 #70

Ahh... A 'The West Wing' reference. Chicago1980 Jun 2016 #88

The Peter Peterson Foundation sulphurdunn Jun 2016 #40

Well, perhaps YOU can answer my question ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #41

I apologize for the "true believer" crack. sulphurdunn Jun 2016 #44

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the OP mcar Jun 2016 #46

Then that is what should have been said sulphurdunn Jun 2016 #47

That is my point. chapdrum Jun 2016 #50

When attempting to make a point, clarity is key. LanternWaste Jun 2016 #60

You win the clever crown. chapdrum Jun 2016 #69

I know who Peterson is and what he represents; but, again, how is his contribution ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #52

Because I didn't like you comment or your tone. sulphurdunn Jun 2016 #65

So you make it a practice to ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #68

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #74

Yes ... It's best to keep that practice in the safety that online line toughness allows. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #75

I think they just wanted you to know your place 1SBM. giftedgirl77 Jun 2016 #79

Ya think? ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #80

+1 fleabiscuit Jun 2016 #93

I guess the Peterson Foundation could have given CAG Jun 2016 #82

It wouldn't have been an issue, worth mentioning. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #83

A primary goal of the Peterson Foundation. Not of the Clinton Foundation. Midnight Writer Jun 2016 #92

Links and sources please to back up your claims Hekate Jun 2016 #34

See the link attached. chapdrum Jun 2016 #37

So what? creeksneakers2 Jun 2016 #71

Thanks Triana for presenting an objective analysis still_one Jun 2016 #33

Wait, I thought that it was just a front to launder foreign cash. Beacool Jun 2016 #35

Exactly, I am quiet proud of President Carter and Clinton, they continued to work for Thinkingabout Jun 2016 #58

Once again, there is no scandal...but that won't stop the GOP from lying over and over. Rex Jun 2016 #38

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #42

This would be a great OP. Or would have been two weeks ago. arcane1 Jun 2016 #53

I posted some of it as an OP nearly a year ago. OnyxCollie Jun 2016 #59

I'd pretend as much as as well if it validated my biases. LanternWaste Jun 2016 #61

Let's see what happens. OnyxCollie Jun 2016 #62

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #89

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #67

Having checked on a few charities in the past, 89% is excellent, about as good as it gets bhikkhu Jun 2016 #43

hmmm... something to consider. nt retrowire Jun 2016 #45

REC. and Thank you for the post. riversedge Jun 2016 #55

This message was self-deleted by its author stopbush Jun 2016 #56

The primary reason for that is that unlike most charities, the Foundation has foreign gov'ts, huge leveymg Jun 2016 #76

This message was self-deleted by its author stopbush Jun 2016 #78

Boom. And down go the republicans and their internet minions. Kingofalldems Jun 2016 #73

And they don't take salaries TexasBushwhacker Jun 2016 #77

I'm actually somewhat disappointed. KentuckyWoman Jun 2016 #81

Given that they are an international charity... Adrahil Jun 2016 #90

Point well taken KentuckyWoman Jul 2016 #96

the haters must be reeling Skittles Jun 2016 #84

K&R nt ProudProgressiveNow Jun 2016 #85

. . . niyad Jun 2016 #86

This is good news. Warren DeMontague Jun 2016 #91

K&R! stonecutter357 Jun 2016 #95