Skip to comments.
Sen. Clinton's family charity not disclosed: paper
Reuters ^
| 2-27-07
| anon
Posted on 02/26/2007 10:18:21 PM PST by Pharmboy
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
OK--we FINALLY got the Clintons. /sar
1
posted on
02/26/2007 10:18:23 PM PST
by
Pharmboy
To: doug from upland
I thought that Bill Clinton said he would be happy to pay more taxes? In fact, I'm positive he said that. To a national audience.
But now we find they're sheltering their money to avoid taxes.
2
posted on
02/26/2007 10:22:04 PM PST
by
Peach
To: Pharmboy
"in an oversight that leaders of both parties have made"
OMG. TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ACTIONS. GD.
3
posted on
02/26/2007 10:27:36 PM PST
by
TheZMan
(Back to property-owner-only voting... now!)
To: Pharmboy
but none of her ethics reports since then have disclosed that fact as required by congressional ethics rules, the newspaper said. So what is there a Senate ethics committee for? Oh, I know, its just a red herring.
4
posted on
02/26/2007 10:32:36 PM PST
by
taxesareforever
(Never forget Matt Maupin)
To: Pharmboy
This is not a concern for the sheeple.
They want security not freedom.The Clintons promise everything
so the average dunce will accept this prima facie.
Integrity, honesty and traditional values have erroded. The
American has accepted compromised values so to ensure a
sense of security.
Why else would a Clinton be such a strong viable contender?
5
posted on
02/26/2007 10:35:04 PM PST
by
ChiMark
To: Pharmboy
Sen. Clinton, a Democratic presidential contender, has been an officer in the family foundation since it was established in 2001, but none of her ethics reports since then have disclosed that fact as required by congressional ethics rules, the newspaper said. Well did anyone really expect Hillary to be ethical?
6
posted on
02/26/2007 10:36:13 PM PST
by
highlander_UW
(I don't know what my future holds, but I know Who holds my future)
To: Peach
I thought that Bill Clinton said he would be happy to pay more taxes? In fact, I'm positive he said that. To a national audience. But now we find they're sheltering their money to avoid taxes.
That is true of most rich folks and who can blame them for using legal mens to avoid taxes. The hypocrisy comes from lawmakers who cry "Tax the Rich" while creating these vehicles for avoiding taxes. That means the rich aren't taxed nearly as much as the middle class.
It is also true of rich liberals who sock much of their income into trusts and foundations while calling for higher taxes. Hypocrites all.
7
posted on
02/26/2007 10:37:59 PM PST
by
Mind-numbed Robot
(Not all that needs to be done, needs to be done by the government.)
To: Pharmboy
"Forgetting" about a $5 million tax write-off means that she is either an idiot or a liar and unqualified to hold any public office.
8
posted on
02/26/2007 10:43:14 PM PST
by
Kirkwood
To: Pharmboy
More of the usual Clingon "Mistakes were made" dodge... Notice that nobody's name is associated with them, though... Those darn mistakes just seem to make themselves...
9
posted on
02/26/2007 10:44:22 PM PST
by
Zeppo
(We live in the Age of Stupidity. [Dennis Prager])
To: Kirkwood
They forgot about mentioning them not taking the deduction.
10
posted on
02/26/2007 11:41:50 PM PST
by
bdfromlv
(Leavenworth hard time)
To: All
"write off more than $5 million from their taxable income since 2001, while dispensing $1.25 million in charitable contributions over that period"
Not bad going.. write off $5 million and give away $1.25 million.
Does that leave $3.75 million hanging somewhere?
Or just $3.75 million untaxed?
11
posted on
02/26/2007 11:54:20 PM PST
by
az_gila
(AZ - need less democrats)
To: ChiMark
With the Clinton's, charity begins a home and ends at home.
12
posted on
02/27/2007 12:11:03 AM PST
by
oyez
To: Pharmboy
"both parties have made"
But why is it the Republican party person is always the one who resigns, gos to jail, or has an investigative committee siced on them?
13
posted on
02/27/2007 2:58:18 AM PST
by
freeangel
( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like what you say))
To: Pharmboy
Taxes are good for the village Hillary, so why are you avoiding them? FRAUDS and PHONIES!
To: freeangel
Somehow they don't spin it right. They end up apologizing which sends the red flags up...you just announced you are guilty. The Clintons never do that.
To: Pharmboy
As usual the Clinton's will declare their right to a "DO-OVER" and the lap dog MSM will "move on"... Never changes. I think we can now declare Bill and Hillary Clinton to be "Teflon".
To: Pharmboy
17
posted on
02/27/2007 3:33:16 AM PST
by
Son House
( The Presidents enemies, are my enemies.)
To: Pharmboy
Opposition research is putting Evita on notice. We can play ruff too!
18
posted on
02/27/2007 3:35:39 AM PST
by
dennisw
(What one man can do another can do -- "The Edge")
To: Pharmboy
19
posted on
02/27/2007 3:39:21 AM PST
by
mewzilla
(Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
To: Peach
The foundation has enabled the Clintons to write off more than $5 million from their taxable income since 2001, while dispensing $1.25 million in charitable contributions over that period, the newspaper reported. Charity writeoffs of $5 million? That's a lot of used underwear...
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson