See the fallacy? The Clinton's are financially paralyzed. They spent $250,000 of "Weinstein's money" not the Clinton Foundation funds, on lowering the cost of HIV medication and supporting women and girls in developing countries.
As I said before they're not giving back a cent. The odds of her donating $250,000 to charity is about the same as Kim Jung-un becoming a Jehovah’s Witnesses.
This is what Charity Navigator an organization which evaluates charities had to say about the Clinton Foundation BEFORE she ran for president. After they found out she was running they changed their tune which is a story onto itself.
"We had previously evaluated this organization, but have since determined that this charity's atypical business model can not be accurately captured in our current rating methodology. Our removal of The Clinton Foundation from our site is neither a condemnation nor an endorsement of this charity. We reserve the right to reinstate a rating for The Clinton Foundation as soon as we identify a rating methodology that appropriately captures its business model."
It's so atypical they can't even figure it out! Maybe they should call Bernie Madoff for some advice. How do you define atypical? Let me check the thesaurus. Let's see... here are a few synonyms---unusual, unorthodox, abnormal, aberrant, deviant. Charity Navigator states they can't condemn nor endorse the Clinton Foundation. So if you're in a giving mood would you feel comfortable donating to the Clinton Foundation based upon what Charity Navigator had to say?
---------------------------------------
You're looking at pure scum:
With no differentiation!
Clinton Foundation ends days of dodging questions over up to $250,000 it took from Harvey Weinstein to say it won’t hand it back
Foundation already spent the money on its programs, spokesman tells DailyMail.com
Those include lowering the cost of HIV medication and supporting women and girls in developing countries
Chelsea Clinton ran from DailyMail.com reporter in Boston Saturday to avoid answering same question
Foundation’s willingness to take foreign cash became huge controversy during White House campaign for Hillary Clinton
University of Southern California is giving back $5 million accused multiple rapist gave it
The Clinton Foundation told DailyMail.com it will not return as much as $250,000 in donations from Harvey Weinstein, saying on Sunday the money had already been spent on the organization’s programs and used for charitable purposes.
The foundation’s decision comes as politicians and philanthropic groups grapple with whether to return donations they have received from Weinstein after numerous women stepped forward this month to accuse the movie mogul of sexual assault, harassment, and rape.
Over a dozen Democratic politicians have said they will give back or donate Weinstein’s campaign contributions to charity.
The Clinton Foundation faced questions about Weinstein’s funding after Hillary Clinton said last week she would re-gift his campaign donations to charity.
Weinstein was a major bundler for Clinton, hosting fundraising events with deep-pocketed Hollywood donors, and personally contributed over $35,000 to her 2016 presidential campaign.
The explanation comes after foundation board member Chelsea Clinton ducked questions about Weinstein’s money from a DailyMail.com reporter while attending a Clinton Global Initiative University event at Northeastern University in Boston on Saturday.
The former first daughter hustled out a side door after the event, evading a reporter as she rushed to her car surrounded by aides and security.
The Clinton Foundation and a spokesperson for Hillary Clinton had previously declined to comment on the Weinstein matter.
We won’t give back a cent of Harvey Weinstein’s tainted $250,000 says the Clinton Foundation - we’ve spent accused rapist’s every cent claims group run by Bill and Chelsea
