2016-10-11, 09:33 | Link #844 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
Quote:
|
|
2016-10-11, 10:24 | Link #845 |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
The Clinton foundation has literally gotten vetted fully and came out 100% clean.
On the other hand, Donald Trump Foundation has literally been operating against New York law for ten years by never gotten its operation approved, had never sent in their legally require yearly audit, and is now shut down entirely and being investigated for being a private slush fund. There is a very good reason Trump hadn't brought up Clinton Foundation recently; 1. he got nothing, 2. Clinton would hammer him for being the President of a foundation that broke State law and collected money illegally for the last ten years.
__________________
|
2016-10-11, 17:39 | Link #848 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/12/us...ryan.html?_r=0
And there you have it everyone. And meanwhile... https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/statu...50167459434496 Last edited by MCAL; 2016-10-11 at 18:11. |
2016-10-11, 19:33 | Link #850 |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
I am referring to the fact that Clinton's foundation actually give to charity. And actually send their audit reports to the government.
While Trump's foundation is questionable in if it is a charity at all, since there is no audits done in its ten years of existence. It has being shut down until New York can determine if it has any right to exist.
__________________
|
2016-10-11, 20:23 | Link #853 | |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
Quote:
So how is it that the same Accountant is able to deliver an audit for the SON'S charity every year, and yet never deliver any audit for the FATHER'S charity? It is very, very hard to see this as any kind of accident. By having no audits, Donald can use the Charity as his secret private bank account. The money in it would also be tax free as he doesn't report it.
__________________
|
|
2016-10-12, 03:55 | Link #854 | |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Holy Terra
|
Quote:
His videos are excellent, I recommend that you want few more of them. |
|
2016-10-12, 15:36 | Link #856 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
|
Quote:
"But they actually give to charity" Where? Well, I can believe that they do donate large amounts. That's easy to do with money you never earned in the first place. But then what happened in Haiti?
__________________
|
|
2016-10-12, 18:21 | Link #857 | ||
Marauder Shields
Join Date: Sep 2012
|
Quote:
Quote:
And his fans still believe in him and spin things like him. Trump Ally Alex Jones: "I Was Told By People Around" Clinton That "She's Demon-Possessed" Spoiler for unbelievable:
Last edited by Dauerlutscher; 2016-10-12 at 18:43. |
||
2016-10-12, 18:24 | Link #858 | |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
Quote:
You see, to actually HAVE a Charity organisation, you are suppose to send an audit of how your money is spent to the State government, every year, to tell them where you actually spent the money. Clinton's foundation did, Eric Trump's foundation did, but Donald Trump's foundation mysteriously did not. To not send the yearly audit, means no one actually checks what the Foundation actually did with its money. Your assumption is that no one checked Clinton's, when in order to legally exist it has been checked every year.
__________________
|
|
2016-10-12, 19:27 | Link #859 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
|
Right, the Trump foundation is certainly bizarre. I don't think it's a massive money laundering scheme, that would just be way too blatant and unnecessary, considering it's something you can get jail time for. I'm not saying Trump is above doing such things, but I think he would do it better.
I think after the audit, he's going to get fined for several million dollars in back taxes and penalties, for not getting the proper registration, and to make up for his self-dealings. He might be prohibited from running his own charity org. But that'll be that. Knowing that's the worst thing that can happen, would explain their carelessness with the foundation. It's kinda the same as large companies setting aside sizable funds to settle legal disputes.
__________________
Last edited by Jaden; 2016-10-12 at 19:48. |
2016-10-12, 19:51 | Link #860 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 38
|
The difference is that most companies set aside funds for legal disputes because of potential liability from their products failing, someone getting hurt on their premises, etc. It's not to pay for their "carelessness" or deliberate deceit being discovered.
|
|
|