Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]This News Story...Not a Shock at All!Clinton Crime Foundation to keep Wienstien's Dirty Dirty Money! [/B]
I never had any real doubt she'd keep the money. Especially when they have done stuff like this:
Chelsea Clinton Funneled Money From Foundation to Help Fund Wedding
Originally posted by SurturThere's no actual financial evidence of this happening.
I never had any real doubt she'd keep the money. Especially when they have done stuff like this:Chelsea Clinton Funneled Money From Foundation to Help Fund Wedding
Meanwhile, there is actual real evidence of Trump using charity money to buy himself a large painting with his face on it. There's actual proof of this.
Originally posted by Firefly218
There's no actual financial evidence of this happening.Meanwhile, there is actual real evidence of Trump using charity money to buy himself a large painting with his face on it. There's actual proof of this.
Right right, of course. Why would you mislead people? Since as I recall, he used charity money to buy a painting of himself from some other kind of charity or something.
Unless I am mistaken? Who did he purchase the painting from?
Originally posted by Firefly218
There's no actual financial evidence of this happening.Meanwhile, there is actual real evidence of Trump using charity money to buy himself a large painting with his face on it. There's actual proof of this.
-If it's someone they hate, then an accusation is as good as proof.
-If it's Trump, then an accusation isn't proof and sometimes/most-times even proof isn't good enough.
This was proven in this very thread.
Originally posted by FlyattractorAnd in regards to this, the Clinton Foundation isn't returning the money because it has been spent already on charitable causes
[b]This News Story...Not a Shock at All!Clinton Crime Foundation to keep Wienstien's Dirty Dirty Money! [/B]
http://variety.com/2017/politics/news/harvey-weinstein-clinton-foundation-1202590796/
“We are a charity. Donations, these included, have been spent fighting childhood obesity and HIV/AIDS, combatting climate change, and empowering girls and women, and we have no plans to return them,”
Originally posted by Robtard
Why would they return the money anyways? If it's money from a scumbag, how better to then turn around and use that money for a worthy cause? Oh Trumpers...
Lol this isn't "oh conservatives". More than one democrat who got money from him has said they are giving money back. It's their virtue signaling that caused people to wonder if Hilary would.
Originally posted by SurturHere's some more:
I truly hope I'm wrong about the painting, otherwise what was just said is incredibly dishonest.
Trump used $258,000 from his charity foundation to pay off legal settlements that involved his for-profit businesses.
He spent $12,000 from the charity's coffers to buy a football helmet signed by then-Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow.
And he spent $10,000 to buy another portrait of himself in 2014.
These are all provable facts. The money trail exists. There is financial evidence.
Meanwhile, your story about Chelsea Clinton using charitable funds has literally no hard evidence whatsoever. It's an interpretation of a stolen email from an uninvolved 3rd party...
Originally posted by Robtard
Um, I said "Trumpers..." and you even quoted me saying that, cos Conservatives are and often can be sensible, sport. But Trumpers.... yeah.
But it's...not Trumpers either lol. The democrats are the ones who started this "I'm gonna give back the money" shit, not Trumpers.
Originally posted by Firefly218
Here's some more:Trump used $258,000 from his charity foundation to pay off legal settlements that involved his for-profit businesses.
He spent $12,000 from the charity's coffers to buy a football helmet signed by then-Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow.
And he spent $10,000 to buy another portrait of himself in 2014.
These are all provable facts. The money trail exists. There is financial evidence.
Meanwhile, your story about Chelsea Clinton using charitable funds has literally no hard evidence whatsoever. It's an interpretation of a stolen email from an uninvolved 3rd party...
So I just looked it up, the 20k, half went to Israel and the other went to a place called the Children's Place at Home Safe.
Why is this wrong, to you?
EDIT: and christ almighty, just looked up the bronco thing..it was a charity!
Originally posted by Robtard
Oh yes it is indeed a Trumper issue, with your silly Trumper hypocrisy, spins, fake news and double-standards. "Oh Trumpers...", indeed.
Lol no, it's the dipshit democrats who started virtue signaling this. This is what lead other people(including Hilary) being asked what they'd do. So it is not Trumpers.
Originally posted by SurturThat's fine, but none of that donation came from Trump. The money he used came from a charity foundation he started, and the charity foundation got the money from outside donors.
So I just looked it up, the 20k, half went to Israel and the other went to a place called the Children's Place at Home Safe.Why is this wrong, to you?
Essentially, Trump spent other people's money to buy himself a painting. The fact that it was at a fundraiser auction doesn't make it less sh!tty.
And your argument does not extend to Trump's other abuses of charity funds that I listed.
Originally posted by Firefly218
That's fine, but none of that donation came from Trump. The money he used came from a charity foundation he started, and the charity foundation got the money from outside donors.Essentially, Trump spent other people's money to buy himself a painting. The fact that it was at a fundraiser auction doesn't make it less sh!tty.
And your argument does not extend to Trump's other abuses of charity funds that I listed.
Surtur will have an excuse why it's different and the same rules do not apply to Trump. Watch
Originally posted by Firefly218
That's fine, but none of that donation came from Trump. The money he used came from a charity foundation he started, and the charity foundation got the money from outside donors.Essentially, Trump spent other people's money to buy himself a painting. The fact that it was at a fundraiser auction doesn't make it less sh!tty.
And your argument does not extend to Trump's other abuses of charity funds that I listed.
The bronco thing was charity as well. Why are you leaving out important context? He spent money to give to a CHARITY. You'd have a point if he gave shit load of money to some crappy artist just to paint his portrait.
Originally posted by Surtur
The bronco thing was charity as well. Why are you leaving out important context? He spent money to give to a CHARITY. You'd have a point if he gave shit load of money to some crappy artist just to paint his portrait.
THIS IS INDEFENSIBLE
He used charity funds for his legal fees. Fukin defend this, I dare you