• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

WIKI: Auditor Reports Clinton Foundation Engaging in Illegal Activities

Thoreau72 said:
Ah, the rules have changed. I guess that would be like they changed the rules for FISA after POTUS acknowledged that he had not complied with that statute?

Thanks for the input.
Click to expand...

Yes, the rules for auditors have changed. Mostly due to Enron, but the Madoff situation contributed as well. Not sure what the FISA and POTUS comment was about. I thought we were talking about Bernie Madoff's auditor?
 
tres borrachos said:
Yes, the rules for auditors have changed. Mostly due to Enron, but the Madoff situation contributed as well. Not sure what the FISA and POTUS comment was about. I thought we were talking about Bernie Madoff's auditor?
Click to expand...

We were digressing, as the thread is about audits for CF, and we were talking about how rules have been changed. My take was how changing rules after the horse is out of the barn has a rather common heritage in government. ;)
 
Thoreau72 said:
We were digressing, as the thread is about audits for CF, and we were talking about how rules have been changed. My take was how changing rules after the horse is out of the barn has a rather common heritage in government. ;)
Click to expand...

We can't. But the rules were changed in 2009. Presumably everything since 2009 should be legit. That also coincides with her time as Secretary of State. Everything could be fraudulent. I guess someone has to show it.
 
tres borrachos said:
We can't. But the rules were changed in 2009. Presumably everything since 2009 should be legit. That also coincides with her time as Secretary of State. Everything could be fraudulent. I guess someone has to show it.
Click to expand...

What I find about her pattern of behavior, keeping in mind she was a practicing lawyer for a number of years and I knew a client of hers, is her practice of doing her level best to avoid keeping records, detailed or otherwise. As Madame Secretary, not having appointed and IG is behavior consistent with minimal and vague record keeping. Or rather, a lack of record keeping. Does it take a thief to know a thief? Perhaps.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
My God it is so sad how easily some conservatives can be fooled.

They see or read something about the evil Libs on 1 of their Con media outlets and fall for it hook, line and sinker. Almost every time.

It really is sad, and getting to be pretty damn dangerous too.
Click to expand...

I actually think it'd be fun to seed really, really ridiculous claims to these people.

Problem is, i doubt i could match the ridiculousness of their own lies.
 
Cardinal said:
Just what millions of people want to read about: exhaustive reports about retention and procedural policy. I can't wait for tomorrow's Wikileaks, which goes into in-depth revelations of how Clinton's secretary didn't cc the tcp reports to the archive department and ended up sending them to accounts receivable instead.

Yep, that's practically Girls Gone Wild as far as America's undecided voters are concerned.
Click to expand...

Just goes to show "They got nuttin'" Just what this election needs, another group that over promises and under delivers (you can relate, Donald).
 
upsideguy said:
It is not illegal to have internal control deficiencies.... This post gets a big :bs



Please use titles that reflect the severity of the point you are trying to make. No one likes Chicken Little or other a grandstanders.
Click to expand...

Didn't read the memo did ya ?
 
Fenton said:
Didn't read the memo did ya ?
Click to expand...

Actually, I did read it. Unlike you, I did not misread it. What you are seeing here are excerpts from an internal control deficiency letter. There is nothing illegal about poor internal control; its just bad management.
 
DiAnna said:
The fact that I've seen literally dozens of real public audit reports, and not one of them has a big red header saying "Attorney-Client Privilege" or "Confidential Draft"... because an auditor is NOT an attorney, and all audits are part of the public record. Also, what the hell is a "KSG"? Besides a type of shotgun, that is. It's ridiculously obvious.
Click to expand...

This was an internal audit. For some reason hiring an internal auditor to find and address operational weaknesses is considered evidence of FRAUD! if you are a right winger.
 
Fenton said:
Having proper record retenion and retrieval policies/ procedures is required by law.

If they had been operating without those procedures then they were violating the law
Click to expand...

True and a real scandal.... Doesn't mean they didn't retain the records, just that they didn't have a written policy in place. It's probably a felony and all the Board members should be jailed for a couple decades or so for not having a lawyer draw up a policy and vote on it - it's that serious... It's about as serious as failing to keep written records for your mileage claimed on your 1040!

The audit also states the Clinton foundation was being run as a Political organization, not a charity.

Apparently the Clintons ignored the list of suggestions needed to bring the foundation into compliance
Click to expand...

Not 'as' but 'like' - as in that was the management style. It's not a crime, just not an ideal way to run an org that is intent on long term survival, which the audit makes crystal clear.

And you don't know whether or not they addressed all or some of the items detailed in the audit. You're just guessing. BTW, the audit was from 2008.
 
JasperL said:
This was an internal audit. For some reason hiring an internal auditor to find and address operational weaknesses is considered evidence of FRAUD! if you are a right winger.
Click to expand...

The fact there was audit is irrelevant. Its what was found and what was ignored.

The audit was in April. The Clinton foundation did this in Oct.

Clinton foundation refiles 3 years of tax returns
Clinton Foundation refiles three years of tax forms | Washington Examiner

Clinton foundation admits it did not report 1 Million dollar gift..
https://www.google.com/amp/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_581e39cde4b0e80b02ca70c0/amp?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us
 
Fenton said:
The fact there was audit is irrelevant. Its what was found and what was ignored.

The audit was in April. The Clinton foundation did this in Oct.

Clinton foundation refiles 3 years of tax returns
Clinton Foundation refiles three years of tax forms | Washington Examiner

Clinton foundation admits it did not report 1 Million dollar gift..
https://www.google.com/amp/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_581e39cde4b0e80b02ca70c0/amp?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us
Click to expand...

It sucks but Hillary is above the law. We should all be very ashamed.
 
Fenton said:
Didn't read the memo did ya ?
Click to expand...

If a charity gets audited and dinged for lack of a record retention policy, the penalty is.... they are required to adopt a record retention policy. No one is going to be charged and prosecuted for a crime. Give me a break.
 
Fenton said:
The fact there was audit is irrelevant. Its what was found and what was ignored.

The audit was in April. The Clinton foundation did this in Oct.

Clinton foundation refiles 3 years of tax returns
Clinton Foundation refiles three years of tax forms | Washington Examiner

Clinton foundation admits it did not report 1 Million dollar gift..
https://www.google.com/amp/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_581e39cde4b0e80b02ca70c0/amp?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us
Click to expand...

The "audit" was in 2008. And please tell me what they ignored, and be specific.

And I do taxes and "refile" returns on a regular basis. It happens. And I doubt if the $1 million from Qatar wasn't 'reported.' Apparently they didn't notify state of the gift, as we've known for a while now, and which is unrelated to the "audit."
 
Trump dodges taxes he's a genius. Clinton's do it they are criminals.

Same old, same old from the hate filled right.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Trump dodges taxes he's a genius. Clinton's do it they are criminals.

Same old, same old from the hate filled right.
Click to expand...

I would think it would depend if the tax dodges being used are legal or illegal.
 
eohrnberger said:
I would think it would depend if the tax dodges being used are legal or illegal.
Click to expand...

Because Trump never released his returns, IMO the people who are calling him a 'genius' were being a premature about Trump's 'genius' and unfair about the Clinton's crimes.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Because Trump never released his returns, IMO the people who are calling him a 'genius' were being a premature about Trump's 'genius' and unfair about the Clinton's crimes.
Click to expand...

Has, or is, the IRS taken up legal action against Trump or any of his businesses?
You'd figure that this would be public information, wouldn't it?
Not necessarily the fact sand figures, but the case being brought or not.
 
eohrnberger said:
Has, or is, the IRS taken up legal action against Trump or any of his businesses?
You'd figure that this would be public information, wouldn't it?
Not necessarily the fact sand figures, but the case being brought or not.
Click to expand...

Same can be said about the Clinton's. I don't know of any legal action by the IRS against them or their foundation. If I missed it, then someone needs to point that out to me.

But I'm pretty sure someone here will say the IRS never investigated Trump because he's clean but the IRS is giving the Clinton's a pass.
 
eohrnberger said:
Has, or is, the IRS taken up legal action against Trump or any of his businesses?
You'd figure that this would be public information, wouldn't it?
Not necessarily the fact sand figures, but the case being brought or not.
Click to expand...

Who knows? He is I'm sure nearly constantly under audit, and I'm nearly 100% sure they propose adjustments with each year (anything that big and complicated it's inevitable, really), but no, there is no reason the public would know about any criminal investigation (highly doubtful anyway, given he and his accountants KNOW he'll be audited every year), since he's a private citizen and his companies all private. Releasing that info would be a major problem for the IRS.

But there is also no indication the IRS has targeted Hillary or the Foundation, either. The CF amended some returns, but it was pretty standard stuff.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Same can be said about the Clinton's. I don't know of any legal action by the IRS against them or their foundation. If I missed it, then someone needs to point that out to me.

But I'm pretty sure someone here will say the IRS never investigated Trump because he's clean but the IRS is giving the Clinton's a pass.
Click to expand...

:shrug: I guess.

The thing is, much has been made that Trump (and his accountants and tax lawyers) have avoided pay taxes for a fair number of years due to legitimate business losses write off. Everyone get bent out of shape.

The Clinton's and the NY Time essential use the same write off, and not a peep.

:shrug: Weird. Inconsistent. Don't we all look for ways to minimize our tax obligations?

JasperL said:
Who knows? He is I'm sure nearly constantly under audit, and I'm nearly 100% sure they propose adjustments with each year (anything that big and complicated it's inevitable, really), but no, there is no reason the public would know about any criminal investigation (highly doubtful anyway, given he and his accountants KNOW he'll be audited every year), since he's a private citizen and his companies all private. Releasing that info would be a major problem for the IRS.

But there is also no indication the IRS has targeted Hillary or the Foundation, either. The CF amended some returns, but it was pretty standard stuff.
Click to expand...

True, however, there appears to be an FBI investigation underway. I'm fully expect that the DOJ will put Comey (or his successor) under political pressure they will trot out the 'lack of intent' loop hole for Clinton again. After all, the Clinton's aren't never responsible for ANYTHING they do, no matter how criminal. It's the new paradigm here in America. The political elite aren't charged for the crimes they commit anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom