INVESTIGATION: "Clinton Foundation Not Suitable For Charity Organization"

[Bill the Cat]

Charity Report: Clinton Foundation meets all standards; Trump foundation not rated.
Charity Watch: Clinton Foundation gets an "A" rating; Trump foundation not rated
Charity Navigator: Clinton Foundation gets low concern; Donald J. Trump Foundation gets High Concern

GuideStar has awarded the Clinton Foundation the "Platinum Seal of Transparency for voluntarily and publicly sharing information about how they measure their progress and results."

I have used these sites to guide my charitable giving for years, and have never had any agency I have given to called into question. As far as I can see, the attacks on the Clinton foundation are based on two things: some poor decisions made in Haiti that had them dealing with short-term problems and ignoring long-term needs or sustainable options (a mistake many charities have made in many places) and politics.

I see no reason to stop giving.

Did you watch the whole video?

[carpedm9587]

Did you watch the whole video?

Yes.

[Bill the Cat]

Yes.

Wow...

[carpedm9587]

Wow...

Bill - watch the video again. There were many broad brush statements made form start to finish, and not a single hard piece of data or detail on any of it. Just a lot of smoke. For example, "they operated outside of the scope of the original incorporation of the foundation," but not any information on exactly what they did that was outside of that scope. They "engaged in activities that would be considered for-profit activities," but again not a single cited instance of what those activities were. Find me the report with any of those details, and I'll be happy to look at it. Until then, I will go with the output of three organizations I have regularly used and whose results I trust - not the vague claims of two men I don't know, who's agenda I cannot determine, testifying to a highly partisan Congress, with little or no detail provided to support their claims.