Clinton Foundation / Clinton Wealth questions linger (POL)

I cannot image why anyone would donate money to a foundation when only 15% of the money goes to charitable causes. Can anyone think of a reason why someone would do this?

15% for Charity - 85% for me
ClintonFoundation - How Chelsea affords a $10 million by the age of 35

Estimates of the Clinton's Net Worth are now approaching Mitt Romney's. I guess it pays to be a civil servant.

Ready for Hillary?

Hmmm, I should start my own charity.

And don't forget, they were broke when Bill left office, or so they said. I guess that is how Hillary will connect with the working class.

Do you have a legit source for that story? The owner of the Free Republic famously said, "FR will never support the abortionist, homosexualist, socialist, mandate loving, constitution trampling liar Mitt Romney."

And you trust them?

There is no reason to provide sources to Forkie, PJ, and Chilly, as it will never sway their opinions. We all know that if Hillary was accepting tens of millions from foreign countries, they won't care. We all know that if Hillary was running a charity that consumed 85% of the cut, and only paying out 15% of the cut, they won't care. We all know that if the charity showed 60% of all expenditures under the category as "other", they won't care.

If you guys change your minds, let us know.

jphelan provided a link to The Federalist which makes the claim:
"Between 2009 and 2012, the Clinton Foundation raised over $500 million dollars according to a review of IRS documents by The Federalist (2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008). A measly 15 percent of that, or $75 million, went towards programmatic grants. More than $25 million went to fund travel expenses. Nearly $110 million went toward employee salaries and benefits. And a whopping $290 million during that period — nearly 60 percent of all money raised — was classified merely as “other expenses.” Official IRS forms do not list cigar or dry-cleaning expenses as a specific line item. The Clinton Foundation may well be saving lives, but it seems odd that the costs of so many life-saving activities would be classified by the organization itself as just random, miscellaneous expenses."
The Federalist provides links to copies of the Clinton Foundation tax returns.

If the facts as reported are inaccurate, DonDiego suggests forkushV set them straight instead of just suggesting the source is untrustworthy.

On the other hand, . . . The Washington Post reports that the "Clinton Foundation will amend tax filings to reflect foreign giving [i.e."foreign contributions]." The question as to why the contributions hadn't been reported in accordance with the Law in the first place is not addressed.

Perhaps clues relating to the Clinton Foundation activities can be found on the former Secretary of State's internet server.

Hey, things change, so . . . "What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?"

Oh, the Federalist-anti-gay-bigotry-is-religious-freedom-Society. When I got there from the FP page I read, "President Obama is not an idiot. When he negotiates away U.S. security, he’s doing it on purpose."

And you trust them?

I'll give you a cut of the AlanLeroy Foundation if you can get some Russian donations for us.

Clinton Strategy #1 - Discredit the source......

Forky - I provided a source which you "don't trust". Can you provide me with a source to that provides a different number for the Clinton Foundation pass through rate? It would be interesting to compare the pass through rates of the Clinton and Bill Gates foundations.

Time to break out the crayons, no?