Skip to comments.Hillary Clinton defends hefty speaking fees
Posted on 07/05/2014 10:59:03 AM PDT by Citizen Zed
After a week of especially heavy criticism, Hillary Clinton is defending the hefty price tags on her university speeches.
"All of the fees have been donated to the Clinton Foundation for it to continue its life-changing and life-saving work."
And Clinton's own husband, former president Bill Clinton, came under fire last month after a new report from The Washington Post revealed he had raked in a staggering $104.9 million for 542 speeches between January 2001 and January 2013.
(Excerpt) Read more at m.wftv.com ...
She's an extraterrestrial. It's been known for years. What do people expect? How many times to you get to meet an extraterrestrial?
The Nytimese reported it back in 1994!
This article (below) exposed the supernatural, shape-shifting entity called Hillary Rodham Clinton.
[Hillary's] . . . blur of [claims of] different roles . . . "We sense that we aren't seeing the 'real' Hillary, and this makes us very nervous." . . . the nation has become accustomed to Mrs. Clinton's intriguing shape-shifting . . . .
“I shall remember to pay it... to myself.”
- Sydney Greenstreet in Casablanca
How much did H*****y save on taxes by laundering that money through their foundation?
... and a bit frugal on truth .....
Pooo girl just trying to make ends meet!
Now it turns out she "donated" her speaking fees to the Clinton Foundation.
Was that before or after she paid taxes on it? Was she lying then, or now?
I know, trick question. She's always lying.
The witch is crooked to the core.
“How much did H*****y save on taxes by laundering that money through their foundation?”
I suppose it depends on whether the money was paid directly to the foundation or to her. If to her she’d have to pay ordinary income taxes minus her deductions. If to the foundation there’s no telling as they’ve probably made it tax free. It is, after all, a donation. If they sent a letter acknowledging the payer’s donation then the payer may be able to take it off their taxes. That may be the scam. (But I don’t know is universities pay taxes.)
This may actually become a scandal, but only if the MSM decides she’s not the candidate they want.
Incidentally, I read when the Haiti earthquake hit she went to the UN and had America’s donation to Haiti funneled through her foundation. I’d imagine that with the UN taking their cut, the Clinton’s taking their cut and the Haitian government taking their cut that maybe 10 cents on the dollar made it to the Haitian public.
The boss is always right.
When the boss is wrong, see Rule #1.
My understanding is that universities are federally tax-exempt , so financially, it makes no difference to them who gets the money.
But the optics are better for them if they donate the money to a charitable foundation rather than to a politician. That way, it looks less like a bribe.
And you can be sure they are more than willing to coordinate with H*****y to make sure the payment is done is a way that is most advantageous to her.
You’d have to be a tax lawyer to fully understand the process.
As for Haiti, even if the donation had gone directly to Haiti, the Haitian people would have gotten just as much out of it as they did after the UN and the Clintons took their cuts. The only difference is one group of criminals would have gotten more, and the other groups of criminals would have gotten nothing.
Either way, the end result would be the same.
And what difference, at this point, does it make?
“And what difference, at this point, does it make?”
The Clinton/Haitian/UN deal made us officially into a third world country. Imagine if you, working as a high level US official with some say in the US side of the deal went to the first beneficiary of the deal, the UN and dealt yourself in. Then you handled the payments to Haiti with, of course, your handling fee. If this was legal and ethical why didn’t Hillary go straight to Congress and suggest it? Because Congress would have been incensed. And, other than one article here on FR, I’ve never even seen it mentioned since. Imagine if a relative of George Bush had done this. They’d still start every news broadcast with, “This is 3,795th day since Obadiah Bush stole money from the taxpayers.”
Wow, at this rate Hillary “1%” Clinton will make Mitt Romney look like a skid-row bum.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.