Don't know. I'm sure they will answer that question if you write to them. I do recall, however, that is has over 2000 employees.
Do you think they would answer why a foundation owned by the self-styled champion of women" has only 30% of it's executive positions filled by women and why the female employees earn an average of 30% less that the male executives doing the same jobs?
Even if I did get an answer it would certainly be a lie. Easier to google http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/12/p...oundation-male-execs-earn-38-more-than-women/ http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guyben...-percent-less-than-male-counterparts-n2148105 http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-05-12/hillary-clintons-equal-pay-hypocrisy
According to your link there.... "according both to Shelton and witnesses, as well as doctors who examined her a short time after the incident, Taylor raped her. He also beat her during the rape" "Taylor denied raping the 12-year-old, and even passed a polygraph test, which Clinton said in her later interview “forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs.” (This indicates that Hillary believed him to be guilty....because he was) "Rodham attempted to undermine the credibility of 12-year-old’s allegations against Taylor, writing that she had “been informed” that the victim, now known to be Shelton, “is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and engage in fantasizing...Rodham wrote that a child psychologist told her that “children in early adolescence tend to exaggerate or romanticize sexual experiences,” and that this tendency was especially common in children from “disorganized families” such as Shelton’s" "There are four moments where Clinton can be heard “laughing” during the interview" "The only piece of physical evidence available was a pair of underwear that had blood on it. Investigators cut out a piece of the underwear and sent it to a crime lab, but a forensic expert hired by Clinton determined that the small sample was not enough to allow a meaningful test. The only remaining evidence was the underwear that had been cut by the investigators, rendering it useless as evidence." The facts are that this man beat and raped a 12 year old. Hillary believed that. She mounted a "successful" defense based on suppressing blood evidence (which would not happen with today's technology), calling the 12-year old's credibility in to question (an absolutely despicable and deplorable tactic involving child rape), and then was able to laugh on 4 separate occasions when discussing the case. How could she have avoided it? Very simple. The only reason she was available was through her OWN legal aid clinic. "The young lawyer worked overtime on the case in hopes of impressing the court, which might then help establish the reputation of her new legal aid clinic." So Hillary traded on this case and trampled on this 12-year old to establish her reputation. I can't speak for anyone else but I can tell you this....I would quit that job, close the clinic, and leave the state of Arkansas before I would agree to take that case, put a 12-year old's credibility into question by suggesting she had fantasies, and then laugh about it in any way whatsoever. And just sayin, Heavy is a blog site that uses mostly unproven writers and caters to young men who like videos, gaming, etc. I had to fix two spelling errors in what I copy/pasted.
I read the article and you conveniently left out this part: Clinton wrote about the case in her 2003 memoir Living History, saying that she desperately tried to get out of the assignment. “I really didn’t feel comfortable taking on such a client, but (Prosecutor) Mahlon (Gibson) gently reminded me that I couldn’t very well refuse the judge’s request,” Clinton wrote. Gibson, in a CNN interview 11 years after Clinton published her book, remembered the young lawyer’s reaction the same way. “I don’t want to represent this guy. I just can’t stand this,” Gibson recalled Clinton pleading with him. “I don’t want to get involved. Can you get me off?” this is ridiculous. you are essentially saying that rather than take the case she should have shut her practice and moved out of the state that is just absurd. I'll take this answer to mean that there was no legitimate way for her to get out of the case.
It's a good thing that she worked overtime to try to get off that case. That's what one would call a "feather in the cap" victory. Let's be real. Clinton probably didn't want to do it. But ended up putting more effort into it because it made her look good. A lawyer defends your rights. Destroying a child's testimony and rape shaming a vict... nevermind, I forgot who we were talking about.
