Quote (AiNedeSpelCzech @ Oct 2 2016 07:06pm)
Grants are the only kind of charity and I'm really good at reading documents.
I am finding it really funny how sloppy their attacks are on this angle. It almost is literally unbelievable. The AP basically did all the work for them in outright cooking the numbers in order to create a misleading, deceptive portrayal of Clinton's schedule in order to raise the existence of a link between Clinton Foundation donors and the State Department that does not actually exist in reality, and then "reported" on their "findings" (which set off weeks worth of similar "reports" by other publications that also predictably turned up nothing), but here these two guys and their surrogates are lobbing these ham-fisted attacks about % spent on charity and how the Clintons are profiting that are easy refuted, if not turned back directly on Trump because his Foundation is nothing but a slush fund that's actually broken laws.
The AP's a credible news organization. Yes they published an absolute stinker and they should be absolutely embarrassed, but Trump et al. could be using that because it actually caused real damage to Clinton's numbers. They could spend the rest of the campaign saying "well the AP found blah blah blah blah blah" and nobody could really blame them for doing it, because at the very least the AP would share the fault in that equally for producing such shitty work in the first place. But here are Trump and Pence, and on down the surrogate line, wasting their time on things that are just demonstrably untrue. It's bizarre.