<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
	<channel>
		<title>Clinton Foundation Suddenly Gets Flawless Charity &#x27;Rating&#x27; Then The Truth...</title>
		<link>/blogentry/116928</link>
		<atom:link href="https://www.lotterypost.com/rss/blogcomments/116928" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<description>emilyg's Blog: Clinton Foundation Suddenly Gets Flawless Charity &#x27;Rating&#x27; Then The Truth...</description>
		<dc:language>en-us</dc:language>
		<generator>Lottery Post RSS Generator</generator>
		<item>
			<title>Original Blog Entry: Clinton Foundation Suddenly Gets Flawless Charity &#x27;Rating&#x27; Then The Truth...</title>
			<link>/blogentry/116928</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">/blogentry/116928</guid>
			<pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2016 00:24:59 GMT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>emilyg</dc:creator>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Clinton Foundation Suddenly Gets Flawless Charity &#x27;Rating&#x27; Then The Truth...<br /><br />Very loudly, during the vice presidential debate, Democrat Tim Kaine vigorously defended the Clinton Foundation against charges of corruption and pay-to-play schemes leveled by Republican Mike Pence. The GOP V.P. pick noted the so-called charity has taken millions of dollars from foreign sources the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jamaica, Bahrain, Brunei and Germany to name a few many of those donations coming while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state.<br /><br />Very quietly, on September 1st only weeks before that V.P. debate the most respected charity ratings organization finally chose to provide the Clinton Foundation a highly favorable rating. Here&#x27;s what our investigation of that coincidence has turned up.<br /><br />When it did, curiously, provide a rating to the foundation, Charity Navigator gave the controversial non-profit the highest possible score four out of four stars. Normally, receiving a rating is not a big deal. But interestingly, Charity Navigator was somehow unable to provide the Clinton Foundation a rating in the past two years.<br /><br />In fact, Charity Navigator&#x27;s own website posted the following warning about the Clinton Foundation as recently as five weeks ago: We had previously evaluated this organization, but have since determined that this charity&#x27;s atypical business model cannot be accurately captured in our current rating methodology.<br /><br />Worse, the unverifiable means of collecting foreign donations gave concern to this organization whose mission is to evaluate how supposedly legitimate charities conduct business for the purpose of carrying out their missions. Consequently, not only did Charity Navigator decline to rate the Clinton Foundation, it actually had it on its fraud Watchlist.<br /><br />MORE...<br /><br />http://www.westernjournalism.com/thepoint/2016/10/06/clinton-foundation-suddenly-gets-flawless-charity-rating-then-the-truth-comes-out/<br /><br />... &#x5b;&#xa0;<a href="/blogentry/116928">More</a>&#xa0;&#x5d;</p>]]></description>
			<category>Blog Entry</category>
			<category>emilyg</category>
			<wfw:comment>https://www.lotterypost.com/blogentry/116928</wfw:comment>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

