|
|
Post by Brighttail on Oct 24, 2016 9:41:41 GMT -5
BTW other expenses count for things like when Bill goes over to Europe and stays in a 'villa' that costs $13,500 a night just for him. A foundation is like any other business, it has perks. Just some businesses can be more perkier than others!
|
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Oct 24, 2016 11:10:33 GMT -5
Npr pushes liberal agenda Disagree that they push any agenda. I see them as very even handed. But all good, use one of the other websites. |
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Oct 24, 2016 11:15:55 GMT -5
BTW other expenses count for things like when Bill goes over to Europe and stays in a 'villa' that costs $13,500 a night just for him. A foundation is like any other business, it has perks. Just some businesses can be more perkier than others! A couple things on that should probably be considered. If he is doing work on behalf of the foundation, then it is fair for it to cover expenses. More importantly, he is a former POTUS. Probably not a good idea for him to stay at a Motel 6 for obvious reasons  I honestly do not have a problem with that. The evidence of the work that foundation actually does points to a "worth it" value imo. It's been pretty successful as far as I can tell. |
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Oct 24, 2016 11:54:32 GMT -5
Npr pushes liberal agenda Disagree that they push any agenda. I see them as very even handed. But all good, use one of the other websites. You are really living in a dream world aren't you? Concerning Clinton staying at an expensive villa fine, but I was showing that was an example of an expense that wasn't disclosed to the public. Also remember that he would need his staff, another 80,000 for them per night plus his 2,000 for the stay for porn movies. Those things would be embarrassed if they were itemized. |
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Oct 24, 2016 12:39:19 GMT -5
Disagree that they push any agenda. I see them as very even handed. But all good, use one of the other websites. Well, this was good until now. |
|
|
|
Post by mrooola on Oct 24, 2016 13:20:01 GMT -5
You are really living in a dream world aren't you? Well, this was good until now. You make to much sense and stick too much to facts. You should speculate and guess more. If you say stuff long enough and loud enough it will become the truth regardless why it's been said. |
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Oct 24, 2016 13:22:18 GMT -5
You are really living in a dream world aren't you? Well, this was good until now. I refer you back to my previous comments that EVERY media push an agenda. NPRs while not as blatant as MSNBC/CNN/Fox it is still pretty biased. |
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Oct 24, 2016 13:34:19 GMT -5
Well, this was good until now. I refer you back to my previous comments that EVERY media push an agenda. NPRs while not as blatant as MSNBC/CNN/Fox it is still pretty biased. I asked you to show me proof from a non-biased source about your claim on the foundation that "80-83% goes to paying administrative costs like her, Bill, Chelsea's salaries." Instead of answering, you asked me what is non-biased. I gave a few that I thought were. You pick one and tell me I'm living in a dream world because you don't think so. I'm not even sure if you actually access their content regularly but that's neither here nor there since you disregarded the others I mentioned. I'm still waiting for you to back the 80-83% number with something that can be verified. You either have it or you don't. If you do, I'd love to see it. If you don't, then just say it's your opinion or the opinion of someone else that you are supporting. |
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Oct 24, 2016 14:28:27 GMT -5
Okay you want some references that I would consider non-biased and true journalism?
Read Mark Halprin and John Heilman's book Game Change which goes in depth into the Hillary Clinton campaign vs Barrack Obama. It shows how much Hillary and more so Bill hate the Obamas with some very bigoted quotes. In that book they also talk about the Clinton Foundation slush fund. I offer this because both those authors are also partnered with MSNBC and Bloomberg.
I would also suggest reading the book Guilty as Sin by Edward Klein. While it is no secret he is not a Hillary supporter and reviewers will attack him as biased, what they aren't attacking is his sources or what they said. He is one of those authors, like Mark Halprin and John Heilman that people come to and tell their experiences, those people are among the closest of the Clinton camp in some cases.
When it come to newsprint and other news media, I cannot honestly give you a non-biased example for any subject that you would feel valid. I feel all media is owned by people who have natural bias and they give direction to their editors, who also have bias, which is then filtered down to journalists. So I could say look at the New York Times piece, but an opposing view could easily poke holes in a story claiming bias. I could give you an example of the New York Post and the other side would say it is a Roger Ailes owned corporation and is right wing biased.
Instead I offer you journalists who researched their information and put them into books. There they can do their own investigation without the oversight of a major corporation of an agenda. Yes they still may have bias, John Heilman is definitely a Hillary supporter and Ed Klein is a Hillary detractor, but if you read the books and the reviews carefully, both books can be criticized as hit pieces against Hillary, but like Wikileaks, the content presented is the truth, people can only whine about the interpretation which is sans the political spin.
So look at people like Catherine Herridge, James Rosen (who Obama set the CIA on) and Bob Woodridge (From Watergate fame). These are the reporters who dig hard and deep with little regard to what someone might say against their reporting. They have a long list of accurate reporting.
Hell, Wikileaks, love or hate them, they have a 100% accuracy rate over 10 years. Not a single thing they have released has ever been disputed and proved to be untrue. From a Journalistic stand point, they simply release the information and let it speak for itself, others will take it and write stories on it for the most part. Just reading what they have released in the last month shows the collusion between the Clinton camp and the Justice/State Dept, the White House and the FBI, all of this DURING her investigation. These emails also show very disturbing quid pro quo between Hillary Clinton while at State and the things she said/did to places like Qatar and other countries and the connection with the Clinton Foundation.
So read a couple of books (not fleeting articles) that truly investigated the whole story from interviews of people who were there. Hell even 13 Hours about the Benghazi mission was blasted as anti-Hillary, despite the fact that she was never mentioned one time in the book and was told by the people who fought that night in Libya and who have never once changed their story. Are they biased? Yes, but can you blame them? They were put in a position where their lives were on the line, they lost brothers and an Ambassador all because Obama and Hillary didn't want to reveal the place they worked for, a CIA annex that was shipping weapons to Syrian rebels.
SO those are my suggestions, take it or leave it.
|
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Oct 24, 2016 15:54:48 GMT -5
I asked you to show me proof from a non-biased source about your claim on the foundation that "80-83% goes to paying administrative costs like her, Bill, Chelsea's salaries."
Surely I don't have to read several books for this?
Again, I have zero desire to defend the Clintons. I'm just asking for specific supporting info for that comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Oct 24, 2016 17:01:39 GMT -5
I asked you to show me proof from a non-biased source about your claim on the foundation that "80-83% goes to paying administrative costs like her, Bill, Chelsea's salaries." Surely I don't have to read several books for this? Again, I have zero desire to defend the Clintons. I'm just asking for specific supporting info for that comment. Sadly they don't post the book online unless you buy it. BTW that 80-83% included several categories, like other expenses which are not itemized. It is a matter of opinion if you believe putting Bill up in a villa is considered an administrative cost. I would agree that part of it could be a legitimate business expense. The problem in that example he was there for a week, never left the villa, had only two recorded "official" meetings, both which took less than an hour and nothing else. So most folks would ask, what was he doing on business at this villa for a week? Two meetings on the same day? What about the other 6? So would it be considered a VALID business expense or part of the perks of being Bill? I would argue that if he isn't taking salary, then his little visit here really was a personal vacation for (and i'm speculating here) having one or more women visit him, but he needed to have a meeting about something to be able to write it off? Would he be the first person to do this? No. But since the foundation refuses to allow a full audit of their books and because the IRS won't do their own audit, we'll never know. So I'm left to believe those investigators who do things like talk to the villa employees and the media that staked out waiting to cover the former President. The employees who delivered their food or the front desk clerk who said 2k charges for porn and movies. Then these investigation journalists got as much data as they could and gave that number. That number is actually not the scary part it is the number of only 7-9% that actually went to charities is the number that saddens me. |
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Oct 24, 2016 17:47:09 GMT -5
I asked you to show me proof from a non-biased source about your claim on the foundation that "80-83% goes to paying administrative costs like her, Bill, Chelsea's salaries." Surely I don't have to read several books for this? Again, I have zero desire to defend the Clintons. I'm just asking for specific supporting info for that comment. Sadly they don't post the book online unless you buy it. BTW that 80-83% included several categories, like other expenses which are not itemized. It is a matter of opinion if you believe putting Bill up in a villa is considered an administrative cost. I would agree that part of it could be a legitimate business expense. The problem in that example he was there for a week, never left the villa, had only two recorded "official" meetings, both which took less than an hour and nothing else. So most folks would ask, what was he doing on business at this villa for a week? Two meetings on the same day? What about the other 6? So would it be considered a VALID business expense or part of the perks of being Bill? I would argue that if he isn't taking salary, then his little visit here really was a personal vacation for (and i'm speculating here) having one or more women visit him, but he needed to have a meeting about something to be able to write it off? Would he be the first person to do this? No. But since the foundation refuses to allow a full audit of their books and because the IRS won't do their own audit, we'll never know. So I'm left to believe those investigators who do things like talk to the villa employees and the media that staked out waiting to cover the former President. The employees who delivered their food or the front desk clerk who said 2k charges for porn and movies. Then these investigation journalists got as much data as they could and gave that number. That number is actually not the scary part it is the number of only 7-9% that actually went to charities is the number that saddens me. Ok, that's fine. I mean, if your larger point is that the Clintons aren't saints, well we all knew that already lol. I doubt that there is anything I could find out about them that would totally shock me. But if the larger point is that they are some kind of secret Illuminati/Joe Gotti hybrid crime syndicate using the foundation as a front I'd have to see the evidence. On a related note. Wife and I just got back from early voting. Line was about 30-40 people deep at 2pm. I asked one of the stewards how the turn out has been and he said it's record turnout, been a steady stream since they opened early voting on Saturday. I was happy to hear that. A lot of sacrifices were made by generations before us so we could have this right. I hope every state has a record turnout. May the candidate with the most votes win (screw the electoral college). |
|
|
|
Post by Brighttail on Oct 24, 2016 17:53:57 GMT -5
Btw here is what we do know. From their own tax returns on the Foundation. This shows: 178 Million coming into the Foundation 5.1 Million spent on charities 35 Million on saleries 50 Million on "other expenses" but total expenses of 90million. So from this form we see 85 million spent on salary/other expenses with 178 coming in. Not quite 80% but the two key things about this is one only 5.1 million to actual charities and the second part is we only get to see the top page. The previous year it was 60% tho. The other pages that itemize the expenses and 'other expenses' are not public. The remaining 90ish million stays within the Foundation. So when the Clintons claim 90-95% goes to charities they are grossly over exaggerating. This is the only thing online I can find. The books i have read says it was worse while she was Sec of State.  The electoral college is a vital part as to how the United States came to be. It was established for the simple purpose so states like New York couldn't decide the election all by themselves, which they would have as their population was close to 50% at that time in American History. It was a concession to get the lesser populated states to get on board like Rhode Island. There has been 240 years that it could have been changed but hasn't because it is the fairest when you have 50 states where the top populated cities are typically for one party. We also know that it is pretty much a foregone conclusion Hillary will win. |
|
|
|
Post by tastegw on Oct 24, 2016 20:54:00 GMT -5
What are we arguing for? Both candidates suck ass, we all agree with that right? Let's leave it there.
Vote for me and I will put Clinton in jail and trump may accidentally stumble and fall off his tower on accident
oh any every American gets TGC VR for free
|
|
|
|
Post by SweetTeeBag on Nov 1, 2016 20:05:48 GMT -5
|
|
