Getting back to the Clinton Foundation. They are required to file information on their finances to maintain their tax favored status. No doubt these finances are being reviewed intensely now. Apparently there was a huge spike in personnel and travel expense from 2012 to 2013, but program expense was flat or down. Hillary left the State Department in Jan 2013 and many of her political operatives began to consult or gain employment with the Clinton Foundation.

It's going to be very hard for her to spin audited financial statements. If I were a Democrat I would be nervous; if I were a Republican I would hold off on the investigation until after the nomination. (Independents love to give advice to Democrats and Republicans.)

Ray Jay wrote:Getting back to the Clinton Foundation. They are required to file information on their finances to maintain their tax favored status. No doubt these finances are being reviewed intensely now. Apparently there was a huge spike in personnel and travel expense from 2012 to 2013, but program expense was flat or down. Hillary left the State Department in Jan 2013 and many of her political operatives began to consult or gain employment with the Clinton Foundation.

It's going to be very hard for her to spin audited financial statements. If I were a Democrat I would be nervous; if I were a Republican I would hold off on the investigation until after the nomination. (Independents love to give advice to Democrats and Republicans.)

I am not so sure. Firstly, the press didn't go after Obama all that much. I think we will find out more about him several years from now than we ever did before he ran. The media got caught up in the frenzy of electing the first Black President. I think there are some equally enamored of getting the first Woman President. We shall see.

Sure, they have done some surprisingly good reporting so far, but I think the idea of helping elect a GOP President (by revealing too much about Hillary's shenanigans) will scare them off.

Frankly, I would love to see the woman behind this ad debate Hillary Clinton. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc3qtfUkOKs

Doctor Fate wrote:
Frankly, I would love to see the woman behind this ad debate Hillary Clinton. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc3qtfUkOKs

So would I. She has improved her attack ads since zombie sheep, but I do wonder what Fiorina has accomplished, other than sending HP into the toilet.

I think a prepared Hillary would tear Carly apart, or would let her expound on her crazy.

Also, Fiorina is not a stranger to foundations with a dodgy financial standing - didn't she have a non-profit and a charity that were both missing the necessary registrations?

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:
Frankly, I would love to see the woman behind this ad debate Hillary Clinton. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc3qtfUkOKs

So would I. She has improved her attack ads since zombie sheep, but I do wonder what Fiorina has accomplished, other than sending HP into the toilet.

I think a prepared Hillary would tear Carly apart, or would let her expound on her crazy.

Hillary is a zombie. She's going to make Democrats wish they could have the signing Al Gore back.

danivon wrote:Also, Fiorina is not a stranger to foundations with a dodgy financial standing - didn't she have a non-profit and a charity that were both missing the necessary registrations?

Great. I'd love to see both foundations dissected.

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:Also, Fiorina is not a stranger to foundations with a dodgy financial standing - didn't she have a non-profit and a charity that were both missing the necessary registrations?

Great. I'd love to see both foundations dissected.

Does Danivon?

bbauska wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:Also, Fiorina is not a stranger to foundations with a dodgy financial standing - didn't she have a non-profit and a charity that were both missing the necessary registrations?

Great. I'd love to see both foundations dissected.

Does Danivon?

Both of Carly Fiorina's? Why not

danivon wrote:

bbauska wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:Also, Fiorina is not a stranger to foundations with a dodgy financial standing - didn't she have a non-profit and a charity that were both missing the necessary registrations?

Great. I'd love to see both foundations dissected.

Does Danivon?

Both of Carly Fiorina's? Why not

Nice sidestep. Now answer the question...

bbauska wrote:

danivon wrote:

bbauska wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:Also, Fiorina is not a stranger to foundations with a dodgy financial standing - didn't she have a non-profit and a charity that were both missing the necessary registrations?

Great. I'd love to see both foundations dissected.

Does Danivon?

Both of Carly Fiorina's? Why not

Nice sidestep. Now answer the question...

Your question was not clear. You just asked about "both foundations". You did not specify whose they would be.

Carly Fiorina set up Carly Fiorina Enterprises - a non-profit that was never registered in the State of California or her home county of Santa Clara, was not incorporated, and was not set up as a "doing business as" record.

She also set up the Fiorina Foundation, a charitable body that was not registered as tax exempt with either the IRS or the California authorities as required if they are to be tax exempt.

http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/ ... 293194.php

If there are allegations that the Clinton Foundation has similar "not actually being legally registered" problems, then yes, I would like to see the same level of scrutiny. I have no problem with looking into any charitable body that there are allegations about.

As long as those allegation have substance and are not just based on sour grapes, of course.

A couple of articles examining Carly Fiorina, one from the left and one from the right.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... -gallagher
http://thinkprogress.org/election/2015/ ... nequality/

She believes in feminism but does not call for any government intervention (which has worked in other countries) to bring it about. Such are the contradictions that tend to come up with minority or female Republicans, at least those who think their gender/race is not being treated fairly. Doesn't she know that everyone is equal here? Stop whining...

I am sorry you were unable to follow that.

Deleted.

freeman3 wrote:Follow what exactly? Her Drivel about feminism without giving solutions to rectify the inequities that she points out. There is NOTHING to follow.

I was talking to Danivon...

Sorry Brad--I misunderstood. I'll delete it.