Mike Pence To America: Trump Never Said Those Things He Said (He also tried to convince everyone Hillary Clinton is the really offensive candidate in the race.)

FTFY, Ekim. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

poopthrowing.jpg

Kinda late to be up, isn't it, Corpy? Your mama should already have cleaned up your dirty little bottom and told you everything was OK.

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

FTFY, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

The shit monster is back.

"Correct the Record" -- which you cited -- is a propaganda wing of the hildebeest political machine, you stupid and misguided lib-reatarded miscreant. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Your opinion of 'Correct The Record' is irrelevant to the fact that BOTH the AIP and Charity Navigator - on their websites - give very high ratings to the Clinton Foundation.

Further, one of your buddies, 'lustylad' made the absolute claim that Charity Navigator was not only the 'gold standard' for determining the quality of charities, but that CN refused to rate the CF. CN's own website puts the lie to that claim. I note that he has not had the integrity to come back here and confess his ignorance. Perhaps you can defend him instead.

If you can present a valid argument as to why anyone should not respect the findings of those 2 non-partisan watchdog agencies, please do so.

Otherwise, just admit that you are an empty shirt, lacking the integrity to admit or even recognize your own confirmation bias.

You can hate the Clintons all you want. I don't like them either. But demonizing their foundation, and therefore the employees of their Charity who work to ensure that the lions share of donations actually get to people in distress - that's the act of a coward.

I am much closer to the facts that any of the responders - YRider or Slothwhatever. I went to Haiti in 2013 and met with the Chief of staff of the PM and the head of the energy ministry for the purpose of repair the electrical grid. The hotel I stayed was over-run with Clinton Foundation dipshits doing nothing but partying. I learned that Sec State Clinton appointed ex-Pres Clinton to top post for economic development with Strongman Gregory Mevs. read below.

https://www.quora.com/Who-is-the-ric...make-his-money

They all raised money to save Haiti and stole the money. This is profound evil. I witnessed it with my own eyes. And, while theywanted and needed our assistance and expertise, there were no funds to work to repair the grid. The scenes of destruction are like post WWII movies and Clinton kept the money for her campaign.

If you can present a valid argument as to why anyone should not respect the findings of those 2 non-partisan watchdog agencies, please do so. read Charles Ortel. Do you recall the wall street ratings agencies being castigated and sued by the Obama regime for their ratings of financial instruments relating to the housing fiasco? yeah. and have you ever had occasion to be rated by dun & bradstreet and/or had a phone call from them in their "diligent" work of rating your business enterprise? if so you would know the lack of scope and the very minor steps those people take in their rating work. I tend to think someone like ortel who digs and digs is a better source than what could be a flyby rating or one that could have been the subject of some pressure. Do you know the type of diligent work these agencies undertake or do you just cite them? do they just take the reported items at face value and do some spread sheet analysis? bone tossing while keeping the meat is an old trick.

You can hate the Clintons all you want. I don't like them either. But demonizing their foundation, and therefore the employees of their Charity who work to ensure that the lions share of donations actually get to people in distress - that's the act of a coward. a misuse of the word coward.
and it is an association with the Clinton's that bring scorn and skepticism to any enterprise and their employees- not the rank and file but donna shalala, and other toadies? a lifetime of shadiness is the demon that izes the enterprise, not the skeptics. count me as a skeptic, the odds greatly swing that way
Originally Posted by Asfaloth54

it makes me say something here to post

I am much closer to the facts that any of the responders - YRider or Slothwhatever. I went to Haiti in 2013 and met with the Chief of staff of the PM and the head of the energy ministry for the purpose of repair the electrical grid. The hotel I stayed was over-run with Clinton Foundation dipshits doing nothing but partying. I learned that Sec State Clinton appointed ex-Pres Clinton to top post for economic development with Strongman Gregory Mevs. read below.

https://www.quora.com/Who-is-the-ric...make-his-money

They all raised money to save Haiti and stole the money. This is profound evil. I witnessed it with my own eyes. And, while theywanted and needed our assistance and expertise, there were no funds to work to repair the grid. The scenes of destruction are like post WWII movies and Clinton kept the money for her campaign. Originally Posted by johnjay

I'm sorry but your anecdotal 'evidence' is hardly persuasive, compared to the objective findings of both the AIP and Charity Navigator.

You claim they 'stole the money', and that you witnessed it. I'm pretty sure if you could prove that you would be famous by now. But you're not, are you?

But hey, present your evidence and we can evaluate it. Actual evidence will certainly carry a lot more weight than the personal opinions of people on the blog site you reference - none of which says anything about the Clinton Foundation.

it makes me say something here to post Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Wall Street ratings and Dun & Bradstreet have nothing to do with Charity Navigator or the AIP - unless your goal is simply to lump them all together in order to pretend some guilt by association is valid. If it is your opinion that ALL rating entities should be questioned, that's fine. But I originally presented the ratings from the AIP, and was told in no uncertain terms that it was Charity Navigator that was the 'gold standard' for rating charities. If you disagree with that poster, let me know. He has disappeared....

Until then....

Do you, or do you not have ANY actual evidence relating to either of the 2 relevant agencies that are the actual subject here, that would reasonably lead anyone to have anything other than a high degree of confidence in their findings? Your 'opinion' on rating agencies is not evidence.

Further, one of your buddies, 'lustylad' made the absolute claim that Charity Navigator was not only the 'gold standard' for determining the quality of charities, but that CN refused to rate the CF. CN's own website puts the lie to that claim. I note that he has not had the integrity to come back here and confess his ignorance. Originally Posted by Asfaloth54

It wasn't a lie, asshole. Charity Navigator refused to rate the Clinton Foundation from April 2015 until last month, when (unbeknownst to me) they succumbed to the relentless pressure of Clinton's thugs and agreed to rate it again.

Yeah, I have the integrity to acknowledge this. Do you have the integrity to acknowledge I was correct for 17 months? Or would you rather lie and call me a liar?

Wall Street ratings and Dun & Bradstreet have nothing to do with Charity Navigator or the AIP - unless your goal is simply to lump them all together in order to pretend some guilt by association is valid. If it is your opinion that ALL rating entities should be questioned, that's fine. But I originally presented the ratings from the AIP, and was told in no uncertain terms that it was Charity Navigator that was the 'gold standard' for rating charities. If you disagree with that poster, let me know. He has disappeared....

Until then....

Do you, or do you not have ANY actual evidence relating to either of the 2 relevant agencies that are the actual subject here, that would reasonably lead anyone to have anything other than a high degree of confidence in their findings? Your 'opinion' on rating agencies is not evidence. Originally Posted by Asfaloth54

You are the one using them, not me

I merely gave examples of rating failures

You ignored the questions regarding what is known by you of their procedures

The hotel I stayed was over-run with Clinton Foundation dipshits doing nothing but partying. Originally Posted by johnjay

Hmmm... I wonder if they accounted for all those Haiti partying costs as "travel" or "training" or "events"?

They would like to stuff everything into "program expenses" but no one is fooled. Does anyone really think their 2,000 employees engage primarily in charity? Folks like Sidney Blumenthal and Huma Abedin? Here are some questionable 2014 numbers from that Footnote 9:

$95.9M in salaries
$17.2M in consulting
$14.2M in events
$20.8M in travel
$2.8M in telecom
$13.5M in training
$7.3M in rent
$7.8M in office expenses

I'll leave out depreciation and capital charges. Who the fuck would want to throw money down this rabbit hole of a "charity" – except for political favor-seekers? Originally Posted by lustylad

Maybe ass-sloth can intern at the Clinton Foundation. That should let him burnish his resume with some serious virtue-signalling!

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...e%20signalling

Your opinion of 'Correct The Record' is irrelevant to the fact that BOTH the AIP and Charity Navigator - on their websites - give very high ratings to the Clinton Foundation.

Further, one of your buddies, 'lustylad' made the absolute claim that Charity Navigator was not only the 'gold standard' for determining the quality of charities, but that CN refused to rate the CF. CN's own website puts the lie to that claim. I note that he has not had the integrity to come back here and confess his ignorance. Perhaps you can defend him instead.

If you can present a valid argument as to why anyone should not respect the findings of those 2 non-partisan watchdog agencies, please do so.

Otherwise, just admit that you are an empty shirt, lacking the integrity to admit or even recognize your own confirmation bias.

You can hate the Clintons all you want. I don't like them either. But demonizing their foundation, and therefore the employees of their Charity who work to ensure that the lions share of donations actually get to people in distress - that's the act of a coward. Originally Posted by Asfaloth54

You'd be the partisan hack citing "Correct the Record" as a source to sustain your POS "opinion", ass-sloth, and it's a fact -- not an "opinion" -- that "Correct the Record" is a partisan propaganda wing of the Clinton political machine; hence, substantively worthless as justification for any rational "opinion".

BTW, ass-sloth, according to their 2014 returns, only 6% of the Fundation's funds was spent on anything like "charity".





It's also notable how hildebeest gets a federal deduction for donating money to herself: it's a scam, ass-sloth.

96 Percent Of Hildebeest’s Charitable Donations In 2015 Went To Clinton Foundation

Hildebeest and her hubby, Slick Willie, deducted $1,042,000 in charitable contributions last year — $1 million of which went to their own family non-profit, the Clinton Family Foundation.

(source)

I'm sorry but your anecdotal 'evidence' is hardly persuasive... present your evidence and we can evaluate it.... Originally Posted by Asfaloth54

Here you go, ass-sloth... ever hear of Denis O'Brien or Digicel? Here are some interesting highlights:


"The Clintons have been working with Denis O’Brien in Haiti since 2010, in the wake of the disastrous earthquake.... Digicel received millions in U.S. tax dollars from USAID, an agency overseen by the State Department... Digicel received grants courtesy of U.S. taxpayers, collected millions in fees from Haitians every time they used the system, and significantly expanded its user base.

By 2012, Digicel had captured nearly 80 percent of the Haitian mobile phone market.... O’Brien, who holds a 94 percent stake in the privately owned firm, continued to rake in cash. In 2014 alone, O’Brien awarded himself $650 million worth of dividends. Clinton Foundation records show that O’Brien personally donated between $5 million and $10 million sometime between 2010 and 2011....

The Clintons expect voters to believe that they’ve never engaged in any “knowingly inappropriate” behavior or quid-pro-quo collusion with Clinton Foundation donors, even when those donors have a history of shady dealing and just happen to make millions off of some Clinton-connected initiative. That’s asking a lot, even if we never find a “smoking gun,” thanks to Hillary’s shrewdly executed email deletion. It would be one thing if the Haiti-O’Brien deal was an outlier—an extreme example on a long list of untainted collaborations with upstanding associates. But it's not."


http://freebeacon.com/blog/oh-denny-...ravaged-haiti/