levels of culpability. i think they should have different counsel. then they would be working against each other. oh. richard? these are federal crimes they re being charged with. this is serious. everyone s in an uproar. how can you do this? people have been paying universities for hundreds of years. not like this. there are endowments to colleges and people are getting admitted whether they re qualified or not. schools have been taking donations and students have been getting in. that s the reality. this isn t a donation. this is a bribe. but it s payments to the university and to the school. lori loughlin has no defense here, fred. doesn t matter who is more culpable, her or her husband. it s over. she must cut a deal. she should. she should have a long time
funding that comes into the clinton foundation regardless of whether it needs to be disclosed or not will be disclosed just to avoid the appearance of impropriety. they wanted to get the optics right. so that s what they said. what they have done consistently shows that it s the opposite. the first time was with the canadian affiliate of the clinton foundation which had over $30 million undocumented. the second time the boston clinton health initiative. now you have these $26 million of revenues not donations. it s like three times the pattern of something. and you wonder why there is this inconsistency of being able to be fully transparent when that s what they have said all along is we aspire for full transparency. well it s easy to say. it s harder to do obviously. and in this case you can understand from an accounting perspective why this isn t a donation literally. it is revenue. speeches on behalf of the foundation. but given the sensitivity of secretary of state, given an upco
property taxes are down. it is time for new solutions. in different districts they allow company representatives to spend time in the classroom with the kids and pushes the corporation and its name directly at the kids. an increasing number of parents and activists are concerned this is a cynical ploy by corporations. the companies aren t doing this out of the goodness of their heart. they are doing it because they want to get that lifetime brand loyalty. i think that school districts really need to think about this. this isn t a donation. this is corporations looking to target children and so it is one thing to take a donation. it is another thing to say in return we are going to allow you to have access to students. strong arguments on both sides and citing research that advertising to children is more are than just turning them into future consumers.