Of course donations are down.

Too many liberals are preparing for mounting legal fees.

From the article...
“... Open Secrets noted that over one-third of the organization’s 2018 donations, $11.9 million, came from just nine donors...”

Gee I sure would like to know who those people were...

I’ve always wondered how they hid their use of funds through their money laundering machines called “foundations”. Here’s two ways that have been described:

Use foundation money to finace campaign travel expenses. “I need to fly my campaign staff to LA for a campaign fundraiser. I’ll bring some foundAtion staff and do a little foundation business in LA too and charge the whole thing to the foundation”

“There’s been a storm disaster on Caribe Island. They need help to repair infrastructure. My foundation will contribute 10 million. My friend in the Whitehouse will attach a 50 million dollar Fed grant to that. My wealthy doners who give to my foundation will form a consortium that my foundation will hire. My foundation will pay the consortium the 60 million dollars to repair the damaged infrastructure on Caribe Island. The profit margin will be huge so the consortium members can kick back some of the funds in campaign contributions.”


The 2 methods described above are examples of how foundations can “launder” money to a politicians advantage as I understand.

They can also put relatives or friends into high paying positions within the foundation, although this can be too obvious.

Any comments or other ways that “foundations are used by politicians to enhance wealth, finance political careers or bankroll political skullduggery?

How does a charity spend more than took in????? 30 million in spending and no one noticed they were in the red?

quote:

Originally posted by gpbst3:
How does a charity spend more than took in????? 30 million in spending and no one noticed they were in the red?

Well, they surely had enough in the bank from previous years to cover the shortfall this time. But that wouldn't be sustainable year after year.

Just like with horse racing, nobody wants to bet on an old nag.

https://www.breitbart.com/clip...-secretary-of-state/

On Wednesday’s broadcast of Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Government Accountability Institute president Peter Schweizer said the Clinton Foundation was experiencing a sharp drop in donations for the third year following Hillary Clinton’s defeat in the 2016 presidential election.

Schweizer said, “This the past year, the Clinton Foundation literally raised 10% of what it did in 2009, the first year that Hillary was secretary of state, and the international numbers were even worse. They had all this money flowing in when Hillary was the chief diplomat of the United States. Curiously in light of the testimony, the number one country for giving money to the Clinton Foundation was not Great Britain. It was not France. It was not Japan, it was Ukraine .

All that money has now dried up, literally. The Clinton Foundation has had a hard time raising money because they don’t have the influence to sell. They don’t have power access to sell, and that, I think, is the primary evidence for what the Clinton enterprise was all about.”

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
https://www.breitbart.com/clip...-secretary-of-state/

On Wednesday’s broadcast of Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Government Accountability Institute president Peter Schweizer said the Clinton Foundation was experiencing a sharp drop in donations for the third year following Hillary Clinton’s defeat in the 2016 presidential election.

Schweizer said, “This the past year, the Clinton Foundation literally raised 10% of what it did in 2009, the first year that Hillary was secretary of state, and the international numbers were even worse. They had all this money flowing in when Hillary was the chief diplomat of the United States. Curiously in light of the testimony, the number one country for giving money to the Clinton Foundation was not Great Britain. It was not France. It was not Japan, it was Ukraine .

All that money has now dried up, literally. The Clinton Foundation has had a hard time raising money because they don’t have the influence to sell. They don’t have power access to sell, and that, I think, is the primary evidence for what the Clinton enterprise was all about.”

Anyone with half a brain knows how corrupt the Clintons have been for decades.They have never faced prosecution and that worries me more than their corruption.

Chelsea may have to really get a job. Welcome to McDonalds May I take your order?

Former President Truman once said that “Any politician who gets rich while in office is a crook”.

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
She better hurry and write a gutsy book before she goes dead broke.

Her and Chelsea just did and it’s only nineth on the best seller list.

quote:

Originally posted by satch:
Former President Truman once said that “Any politician who gets rich while in office is a crook”.

What about one that actually gets a little less wealthy because of it? Like President Trump.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by satch:
Former President Truman once said that “Any politician who gets rich while in office is a crook”.

What about one that actually gets a little less wealthy because of it? Like President Trump.

That's the mark of integrity.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by gpbst3:
How does a charity spend more than took in????? 30 million in spending and no one noticed they were in the red?

Well, they surely had enough in the bank from previous years to cover the shortfall this time. But that wouldn't be sustainable year after year.

For those of us who routinely deal with financial statements, the Clinton Foundation's situation isn't unusual. Trying to describe their 2017 financials in somewhat simple terms:

$26M donation & grant revenue
$23M income from investments
$ 7M other revenue
-----
$56M combined revenue

$43M program service costs
$17M administration & fund raising costs
-----
$60M combined expenses

$4M loss for the year

The fund has assets of:
$ 10M cash
$ 92M property
$185M investments
$ 38M pledges for future years
$ 4M other assets
------
$329M combined assets

And minimal debt of $6M

It does appear that the foundation has lost much of its former size. But at the end of 2017, it can survive a long time with years such as 2017.

It'll only become a problem, when there's not enough revenue to cover private jet travel.