#$%$ LIAR!!! You are such an #$%$ liar, rvga. Independent organizations determined only about 9% of the Clinton Foundation money goes to anything approaching charity. In fact, they gave the foundation a terrible rating, until the Clinton mafia exerted pressure to have the rating pulled. I personally know they gave the Haiti aid they were managing to cronies who built shoddy projects; my brother in law is an architect down there for the past year trying to fix the mistakes. Raping the poorest people in the western hemisphere is sick. I know you liberals absolve any left winger of moral responsibilities, but admit it, dont lie about it. the Clinton Foundation is a pay for play money laundering rackteeting operation, and if we still had rule of law in America, the FBI would be investigating it and the grand jury would be indicting. So if you want to pursue Her Rottenness's policies just say so, but dont lie about the Clinton Foundation. If you keep it up, I hope you burn in hell.
That was the response to a extreme fringe rant. I know when you live in an echochamber- you pick what you want and ignored that - and you think that is believable. Please do not talk about your moral compass- shove it- mine is as good as yours and I mean it.
If Clinton Foundation work is wrong why the hell did Trumph contribute more then $100 Million- was it play for pay. Keep talking in your Echochamber- and you will find FICTION to be FACTs.
Fred - there are several people promising cures with Laetrile too. I am presenting facts from a an organization which does this work:
CharityWatch, a project of the American Institute of Philanthropy, gave the Clinton Foundation an “A” rating.
Daniel Borochoff, president and founder of CharityWatch, told us by phone that its analysis of the finances of the Clinton Foundation and its affiliates found that about 89 percent of the foundation budget is spent on programming (or “charity”), higher than the 75 percent considered the industry standard.
By only looking at the amount the Clinton Foundation doled out in grants, Fiorina “is showing her lack of understanding of charitable organizations,” Borochoff said. “She’s thinking of the Clinton Foundation as a private foundation.” Those kinds of foundations are typically supported by money from a few people, and the money is then distributed to various charities. The Clinton Foundation, however, is a public charity, he said. It mostly does its own charitable work. It has over 2,000 employees worldwide.
“What she’s doing is looking at how many grants they write to other groups,” Borochoff said. “If you are going to look at it that way, you may as well criticize every other operating charity on the planet.”
In order to get a fuller picture of the Clinton Foundation’s operations, he said, people need to look at the foundation’s consolidated audit, which includes the financial data on separate affiliates like the Clinton Health Access Initiative.
“Otherwise,” he said, “you are looking at just a piece of the pie.”
Considering all of the organizations affiliated with the Clinton Foundation, he said, CharityWatch concluded about 89 percent of its budget is spent on programs. That’s the amount it spent on charity in 2013, he said.
We looked at the consolidated financial statements (see page 4) and calculated that in 2013, 88.3 percent of spending was designated as going toward program services — $196.6 million out of $222.6 million in reported expenses.
Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina says that “so little” of the charitable donations to the Clinton Foundation “actually go to charitable works” — a figure CARLY for America later put at about 6 percent of its annual revenues — but Fiorina is simply wrong.
Fiorina and others are referring only to the amount donated by the Clinton Foundation to outside charities, ignoring the fact that most of the Clinton Foundation’s charitable work is performed in-house. One independent philanthropy watchdog did an analysis of Clinton Foundation funding and concluded that about 89 percent of its funding went to charity.
Simply put, despite its name, the Clinton Foundation is not a private foundation — which typically acts as a pass-through for private donations to other charitable organizations. Rather, it is a public charity. It conducts most of its charitable activities directly.
If you HATE the person, do not beat down on the good work done by the Foundation.
You mean the can was not opened by Grassley. Can you start getting FACTS straight first before you ASK others?
With insurance it is $47 and the rest of it is paid by your insurance- they send the bill next year by way of increased insurance cost.
Mylan bought the rights to Epipen and made about 200 million dollars. In 2007 this medication was $57 dollars and increased to $100 and now it is $ 600 per twin pack because they stopped making single ones. Bill passed by congress to allow patients who needed two packs to get through insurance but Mylan used that as an excuse to stop making twin packs.
The first senator who commented on this was Grassley, then Kolbuchar joined followed by others. Hillary joined today. This is a medication which is about less then a $1 a dose and the other then the wrap around nothing changed to explain this price increase. Those on Medicaid, Medicare, VA and Tricare get at tax payers expense but the ones with private care have to pay a large amount to get this filled. This is a life saving device. I am talking from the front line and dumb struck at the response.
If they shake hard and it falls to about $8 - I will thank them because I can load up a few more. Lol.
Why ten in this case?
What Does Confidential Treatment Application Mean?
A form filled out in accordance with a company's 8-K, 10-Q, or 10-K report. It allows for information in the SEC filing to be kept secret, if leaking such information could cause material or financial harm to the company or a business partner. Investopedia explains Confidential Treatment Application
For example, specific pricing information in company contracts with clients may qualify for confidential treatment. This is because exposing such information would most likely hurt a company's financial performance as competitors can use this information to undercut the company.
These requests are not usually granted by the SEC at will, but in certain instances it can be deemed in the best interest of the company and investors to keep the information confidential for a certain period of time.
s. To illustrate, we
found that a considerable number of stocks were delisted within 3 months after they were filed
for confidential treatment. A majority of them were delisted due to merger and acquisition, and
most of the price appreciation was achieved before they were filed for confidential treatment.
This finding contradicts the common belief that investment firms use confidential treatment to
hide their private information about possible further merger and acquisitions; in which case,
stocks should appreciate more after they were filed for confidential treatment. The funding was
more aligned with the fact that firms use confidential treatment to hide their liquidatin
As cited on the SEC’s website4
, the SEC will grant confidential treatment if
disclosure of holding information might, 1) identify the holding natural person, certain estates,
or trusts; 2) reveal an ongoing acquisition or disposition not completed by the end of the
reporting period; 3) reveal open risk arbitrage positions; and 4) reveal investment strategy that
use block positioning.