Clinton Foundation spent 9 million dollars (out of $138M) on charitable grants (roughly 6%)

[Baobab]

is there another side to this story than just they spent a lot of money on salaries?

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/

maybe there is- but the low figure is fairly damning.

They need to explain more about how they spent their money and what their accomplishments with it have been.

Since they are asking for the nations trust, this is a reasonable question.

nobody is "entitled" to the Presidency of the United States. this is not a monarchy.

[insta8er]

2. It can all be explained, countdown to..right wing conspiracy, Karl Rove, Look a squirrel>>

[radical noodle]

3. Most of the foundation money doesn't go to grants...

It goes directly to the project.

How to understand the Clinton Foundation
https://philanthropy.com/article/Opinion-How-to-Understand-the/230745

2014 information
https://www.clintonfoundation.org/sites/default/files/clinton_foundation_report_public_2014.pdf

[Onlooker]

4. It seems like you didn't read your own link

Your link says that what makes the Clinton Foundation unusual (though not unique) is that it is an "operating foundation," meaning that it actually employs staff and provides infrastructure to conduct its activities, unlike many other charities that simply give money to other charities. So, the Foundation actually employs people to help fight AIDS, start small farms, address climate change, etc. Given that, obviously labor is going to be a sizable part of the expense. According to your link, the foundation spends 12% of its revenue on travel and conferences and 20% on salaries, but perhaps you have an idea of how to implement a service without employing people? Read your own link. It answers your questions. So, if you're trying to discredit the Clintons, you might want to go to Carly Fiorina's website and use her information.

From your link:

We looked at the consolidated financial statements (see page 4) and calculated that in 2013, 88.3 percent of spending was designated as going toward program services — $196.6 million out of $222.6 million in reported expenses.

[Baobab]

5. I would apprecite it if you do have links - Ive read a lot of negative stuff

Huge amounts of money vanishing into impressive sounding projects that when investigated never had anything to show for it.

Shams.

Investigative journalism, not right wing media.

[Onlooker]

7. I'm citing facts in the link provided by the you n/t

[Baobab]

9. People need to have several years, that is true.

What year was the Haiti earthquke?

[uponit7771]

19. Facts, even from their own links, have a Hillary bias now

[pnwmom]

6. CharityWatch gives it an A, for 88% of its expenses going to programs, only 12% to overhead.

Unlike some charities that only dole out grants to other programs, the Clinton Foundation runs actual programs itself.

And the Charity watchdog rates the Clinton Foundation as among its top charities for Peace and International Relations.

https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillary-chelsea-clinton-foundation/478

[Baobab]

8. Ive never heard of a charity with so many questions about them frankly.

I have a bunch of their form 990s and I hope to find some time to dig into them soon. Maybe tomorrow.

[pnwmom]

12. Oh, really. Well you should take a look at other charities with much lower ratings.

The number of "questions" about the Clinton Foundation is merely a reflection of the attacks by the Clinton haters ever since the President first took office.

[uponit7771]

20. Questions from winger sources aren't questions, adults don't trust wingerish sources

[Unicorn]

10. I suspect this is back to where they donated to the Clinton foundation.

I had read she had done that in the past and said it was charitable.

There are big questions on that foundation and things they don't do with the money. As well as the Haiti Money Bill never delivered for the rebuilding of Haiti after the earthquake.

[Baobab]

11. Right, exactly. The earthquake would seem to have demanded a "muscular" response.

But, apparently none occurred.

Does anybody have more info on their projects (apart from the goldigging) in Haiti now?

[Unicorn]

13. google bill clinton haiti money

There are plenty of respectable links.

[Unicorn]

14. From Democracynow.org

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/1/13/headlines/nyc_protesters_target_bill_clinton_over_conditions_in_haiti_6_years_after_earthquake

Dahoud Andre: "Today is the 12th of January 2016, six years after the earthquake. And for us, it was important to be in front of the Clinton Foundation, because Bill Clinton, as head of the IHRC, Interim Haiti Recovery Commission, was responsible for the $6 billion that came into his hands. He had unlimited control of this money. Six years after the earthquake, not much has changed, and as a matter of fact, Haiti is in worse condition than it was in 2010. Only Bill Clinton can tell the world what happened with this money."

[dreamnightwind]

15. Thanks, there are few things more respectable than DemocracyNow - eom

[nc4bo]

21. Poor Haiti. Poor brown people.

There are questions on the half a billion dollars the Red Cross raised to help rebuild Haiti after the earthquake.

It's so easy to get over on poor brown people. It's not even a big secret.

[dreamnightwind]

23. I haven't done my homework re Red Cross or Clinton Global Initiative money in Haiti

so I'll refrain from comment.

On the more general statement though, obviously we do have a long history of getting over on disempowered people, which have more often than not been brown or black races, no denying it. I think things are changing, and we're now seeing the powers that be getting over on more white people too. Some call it progress, LOL.

[yourpaljoey]

16. So duplicitous she even makes Trump jealous: she has out-Trumped Trump!!!

[sufrommich]

17. Is there any anti Hillary right wing meme that

won't be embraced on DU? Inquiring minds want to know.

[DrDan]

18. you did read the link, right?

"We can’t vouch for the effectiveness of the programming expenses listed in the report, but it is clear that the claim that the Clinton Foundation only steers 6 percent of its donations to charity is wrong, and amounts to a misunderstanding of how public charities work.'

[MineralMan]

22. I suggest that, if you're going to supply a link when you

attack Clinton, that you take the time to read ALL of the content at that link. Had you done so in this case you'd know that charitable grants are not how the Clinton Foundation operates. Instead, they run their own programs, rather than funding other charities. That information is right there in the link you posted.

As an attack on the Clintons, your link simply doesn't work. Sorry. Do go read everything at the link. Then, I suggest self-deleting this misleading post.