96% of Clintons’ donations went to their foundations.


"Hillary Clinton and her husband Bill deducted $1,042,000 in charitable contributions last year — $1 million of which went to their own family non-profit, the Clinton Foundation."

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/12/96-percent-of-hillarys-charitable-donations-in-2015-went-to-clinton-foundation/#ixzz4H9PHO8Lj



"Charity begins at home."   "I have to pay the bills,"  Bill said.  pl  

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

40 Responses to 96% of Clintons’ donations went to their foundations.

  1. toto says:

    I was under the impression that this is precisely why foundations exist in the first place?
    As a related example, there’s a lot of reasons to dislike G. W. Bush, but IMO giving through the GW Bush foundation isn’t one of them:

  2. turcopolier says:

    So, you think that family foundations exist so that you can launder your money back to yourself tax free? pl

  3. Joe100 says:

    Having just (at long last) completed an organization’s IRS application for non-profit charitable status, i can attest that most of the (lengthy) application form’s questions target information that ensures such a foundation cannot launder family (or personal) funds to avoid taxes.

  4. turcopolier says:

    How naïve! I created and ran a family foundation that operated in the US and overseas. There are a multitude of dodges to be used to regain the money if you are a crook. Salaries paid to friends, consultant fees for “friends,” scholarships to friends children and other relatives, kickbacks on grants, dummy projects with the potential for moving money around to create a firebreak between you and it and then kickbacks. I had to talk to many, many people who did such things here and overseas. Patronage, patronage, patronage. This works really well if you are sure you will not be investigated. pl

  5. Kooshy says:

    Colonel, FYI, there is this old Persian proverb that exactly fits your comment to this report, here is how it translates ” the lamp that is needed (fit) at home, is forbidden to be given (donated) to the mosque.

  6. different clue says:

    ” People want to know if their Clintons are a crook. Well . . . we’re NOT a crook!
    We’ve . . . WORKED for everything we’ve got.”
    –Hillary Milhous Clinton

  7. BabelFish says:

    Tammany Hall,updated and made global.

  8. So the Clintons donated a million dollars to the Clinton Family Foundation which pays the salaries of many of those working for the various Clinton Foundations/Initiatives and got a tax break for doing so. Certainly sounds like a tax accounting loophole available to the one percenters. Probably not illegal, but surely another thing to resent about the one percenters and our rigged system.
    Can I create a family foundation and donate a substantial portion of my income and use that to pay my sons who work for a TTG Global Initiative? I’m sure I can come up with a suitable tax exempt charitable goal for the TTGGI.

  9. sillybill says:

    You can form an environmental group investigating the health of the inland waterways. Buy some boats, pay for the gas and travel expenses, get certified as water quality inspectors, etc. Of course you’also have to buy nets and fishing rods to capture enough biological specimens to examine.

  10. Bobo says:

    I saw a number once that puts their foundation(s) into perspective. It’s the 500th largest in the country but the 1,700th in what goes out the door for charitable purposes. I’m sure these numbers have changed.

  11. Eric newhill says:

    People will say all kinds of things pro and con about this. There will be lots of slippery commentary. Lots of dopey fools making excuses.
    Bottom line, can it really be justified that career public servants have a need to donate and write off a $million? Seriously – these people work for us?

  12. steve says:

    One of the reasons we should put a cap on the charitable giving tax deduction. I would set it at $50,000.

  13. Swampy says:

    OT, but the soup’s on.
    “As you see the U.S. presidential elections are becoming a farce, a big political performance where the voters are far from playing the leading role. Everything is being settled behind the scenes as it was with Bernie Sanders.”
    Cell phone #s, emails of every Dem in congress. Content from Pelosi’s personal computer.
    and it’s only August.

  14. Dubhaltach says:

    In reply to The Twisted Genius 12 August 2016 at 08:08 PM
    The betterment and upliftment or the clan McDubhaltach is a charitable goal near and dear to my heart … And there’s this bridge in need of refurbishment …

  15. Fred says:

    That’s nothing. Here’s the other story:
    People get shot in the back 5 times (but not robbed) every day in Washington D.C.

  16. MRW says:

    Exactly! Foundations exist to help those who have $50 million or more to avoid taxes. They are a “Phase IV” tax setup. Only two tax attorneys in each state, with the exception of CA and NY, have the license to create Phase IV foundations. These attorneys are required to be licensed annually by New York University after refresher courses to keep up with salient tax law changes. [If your lawyer says he can create a foundation for you, he or she is using a Phase IV tax attorney to accomplish it. Most Phase IV tax attorneys work for other attorneys who are creating foundations smaller than $50 million.]
    These are not the same as non-profit orgs. Foundations are only required to spend 10% of their earnings annually on whatever the foundation was created for. The rest–90%–takes care of the owners of the foundation. Bill Gates’ foundation, for example, takes care of all his personal living, maintenance, and travel expenses, in addition to providing him and his foundation ‘employess’, like his daughter, with a ‘salary’. All while getting the kudos for being a big-boy philanthropist and under the radar tax-wise. Foundations are so old in this country that it is doubtful they will be changed.
    I remember meeting the sister of a gay NYC fashion designer who died of aids. The designer had a foundation. I met her at a fund-raiser she was holding for the foundation, ostensibly to combat aids. Spent time with her over the following two days. She crowed about what she could get away with: her new multi-million dollar penthouse on Central Park, her $250/pop massages, exotic travel and lodgings, etc. She had grown up in Harlem and couldn’t believe her good fortune inheriting what she did.

  17. MRW says:


  18. Joe100 says:

    I plead guilty to being naive about this! Your points are well taken – I just have not spent enough (any) time around criminals. And your statement that “this works really well if you are sure you will not be investigated” is key – clearly the current situation re: Clinton Foundation.
    With the FBI leaks I wonder if the fix can prevail?

  19. turcopolier says:

    IM experience new money businessmen are mostly willing to break various laws in various countries if they think they can get away with it and they generally have no social conscience whatever. Will “the fix” hold in this case? It probably will because the Borgist media are determined to minimize or ignore it. pl

  20. Freudenschade says:

    Although they may sound the same, the Clinton Family Foundation is distinct from the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation (of the influence peddling questions).

  21. turcopolier says:

    So what? they can launder money back to themselves from both and the CGI. pl

  22. Dubhaltach,
    A worthy goal, I’m sure. But I’ll think I’ll stick with a more maritime endeavor.

  23. sillybill ,
    I like the cut of your jib. I can see commissioning of a fleet of steam launches and a square rigger or two. I would definitely issue a letter of marque to these guys as the riverine flotilla of the TTGGI.

  24. Fred says:

    Only two lawyers in NY can do this type of law? That’s absurd.

  25. Freudenschade says:

    They could, but so far I have seen no evidence that the Clinton Family Foundation is involved with influence peddling, money laundering or anything other than garden variety charitable contributions.

  26. scott s. says:

    You can do something called a donor-advised fund which has some of the same benefits — immediate deduction (with advantage of contributing stock or other assets with untaxed capital gain) and then designate which 501c(3) get the money and when. You still need a 501c(3) vehicle to wash the money through (make sure it isn’t a tea-party or other charity on a BOLO list).

  27. crone says:

    Wiki lists Clinton Foundation
    The Clinton Foundation (founded in 1997 as the William J. Clinton Foundation,[4] and called during 2013–15 the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation[5]) is a nonprofit corporation under section 501(c)(3) of the U.S. tax code. It was established by former President of the United States Bill Clinton with the stated mission to “strengthen the capacity of people throughout the world to meet the challenges of global interdependence.”
    I cannot locate a 2nd foundation or non-profit 501(c)(3)
    Perhaps you could help w/ this?

  28. turcopolier says:

    OK. They have three foundations to launder money through. pl

  29. Croesus says:

    One of the more maddening things I heard Dennis Ross say — on a Diane Rehm show over 5 years ago, someone called in & complained that representatives for Israel had outsized influence.
    Ross agreed.
    He said, “You have the same opportunities to use the same methods; get out and do it.”
    Does an analogy hold?
    Do all of the correspondents on SST have the same opportunities, and access to the same legal advice, as Bill, Hill and Chelsea to gather and shelter huge amounts of wealth?
    (Heck, does Ross’s statement ring true?)

  30. Croesus,
    I think that, if Ross did indeed say that, it raises a much larger question.
    It would appear that his conception of the United States is not as a constitutional republic based upon an idea of citizenship, but as place where members of different ethnic groups compete for power in order to favour their own – whether they be in the United States or outside it.
    As Ross has admitted that he has no serious commitment to – probably indeed, no real understanding of – ideas of constitutional government, we need to be clear as to how many of his fellow ‘Borgists’ share his views.
    What, for instance, about Richard N. Haass?

  31. Freudenschade says:

    If I were advising you in building a case for prosecution, I’d suggest trimming the bit about the family foundation. It exists to create a nice picture of the Clintons as charitable givers for political PR. Focus on the other foundations, rather than undercutting your case in this way.

  32. MRW says:

    Only two lawyers per state are licensed annually as Phase IV tax attorneys by New York Univ, with the exception of CA and NY, which I believe have four. It’s a two-week process to be re-licensed every year, with a course and a supposedly grueling test. Generally in the first quarter when it’s cold in Manhattan, as my Phase IV tax attorney friend bitched. These tax attorneys are registered with the IRS as Phase IV tax attorneys, and have a direct line to the regional IRS director.
    Ever see that guy in a prominent commercial *years ago* whose jowls shook and who urged you to contact him if you had a net $3,000,000 estate and how he could set you up to save taxes/money? He was a Phase II tax attorney, not Phase IV.
    As I wrote, Phase IV tax attorneys work almost exclusively with other attorneys, who will advertise their ability to help you set up trusts and foundations, except for those who have monster estates; ie, the 1%. Ten to 15 years ago, that lower limit was net $50 million. I don’t know if that amount has risen.
    I don’t know who controls the number of Phase IV attorneys, but I believe it is the IRS in concert with NYU’s tax dept. Don’t hold me to that.

  33. Swami Bhut Jolokia says:

    Would our esteemed host would undo all the charitable works done by the Ford Foundation, the Rockerfeller Foundation, the Gates Foundation etc. to make a point against the Clintons?

  34. turcopolier says:

    Did I say that? Are the Clintons all these other people? Is the possibility there to launder money? Yes. pl

  35. A point there are sources that are not Tucker Carlson’s The Daily Caller that can be used, particularly since the Clinton Family Foundation is not the same as the Clinton Foundation.
    The Clinton FAMILY foundation appears to be an actual charity.
    The CFF is simply a clearing house for funds that go elsewhere, while CF is used to support the Clinton entourage and for subtle influence peddling.

  36. sillybill says:

    I’ll sign on as maintenance crew. Not sure what I’ll tell my wife.

  37. Fred says:

    “I don’t know who controls …”
    Yeah, you don’t but you pretend you do.

  38. MRW says:

    I know the specification, not who specified it, specifically.

Comments are closed.