Thread: Charity Watchdog: Clinton Foundation A ‘Slush Fund’

Charity Watchdog: Clinton Foundation A ‘Slush Fund’

Published April 26, 2015

Facebook0 Twitter55 livefyre2006 Email Print



reuters


By Isabel Vincent, NY Post
The Clinton Foundation’s finances are so messy that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put it on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits last month.

The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.

The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.

On its 2013 tax forms, the most recent available, the foundation claimed it spent $30 million on payroll and employee benefits; $8.7 million in rent and office expenses; $9.2 million on “conferences, conventions and meetings”; $8 million on fund-raising; and nearly $8.5 million on travel. None of the Clintons are on the payroll, but they do enjoy first-class flights paid for by the Foundation.

In all, the group reported $84.6 million in “functional expenses” on its 2013 tax return and had more than $64 million left over — money the organization has said represents pledges rather than actual cash on hand.

Some of the tens of millions in administrative costs finance more than 2,000 employees, including aid workers and health professionals around the world.

But that’s still far below the 75 percent rate of spending that nonprofit experts say a good charity should spend on its mission.

http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/04/26...ion-slush-fund

How foreign cash made Bill and Hillary ‘filthy rich’

By Bob Fredericks

April 20, 2015 | 10:48pm

Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton

Hillary Rodham Clinton used her clout as secretary of state to do favors for foreign donors who gave millions to her family foundation — and who paid millions more to her husband, Bill, in speaking fees, a new book charges.Records show that of the $105 million the former president raked in from speeches over 12 years, about half came during his wife’s four-year tenure at the State Department.

The claims in “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” come just a week after she launched her presidential campaign.

They raise questions about shady foreign money flowing into the Clinton Foundation — and what actions Hillary took in her official capacity in exchange for the cash.

“During Hillary’s years of public service, the Clintons have conducted or facilitated hundreds of large transactions,” writes author Peter Schweizer, according to The New York Times, which first reported the story.

“Some of these transactions have put millions in their own pockets.”

Schweizer — a former speech-writing consultant for President George W. Bush — said he found a clear “pattern of financial transactions involving the Clintons that occurred contemporaneous with favorable US policy decisions benefiting those providing the funds.”



One example of an alleged quid pro quo cited by the Times and other sources involved the State Department’s backing of a free-trade agreement with Colombia that benefited a company founded by a big donor to the Clinton Foundation.

Hillary opposed the trade deal when running for president in 2008 because of the South American country’s poor record on workers’ rights.

But then the company, Canadian-based Pacific Rubiales, and its founder, Clinton Foundation board member Frank Giustra, donated “millions” to the foundation, The International Business Timesreported.

In 2010, the State Department under Hillary lauded Colombia’s human rights record, allowing Giustra’s company to reap huge profits.
The book also examines lucrative development contracts awarded to foundation donors following the devastating Haitian earthquake in 2010. And it reports that Hillary’s brother, Tony Rodham, sat on the board of a small North Carolina mining company that in 2012 got one of only two coveted “gold exploitation permits” from the government of Haiti — the first issued in more than 50 years, according to the website Breitbart.




Bill Clinton himself was paid $1 million by a Canadian bank and major shareholder in the Keystone XL oil pipeline as the State Department was considering the project, Schweizer charges.

Records show that Bill’s earnings from appearance fees — both foreign and domestic — spiked at $17 million in 2012, Hillary’s last year at State.

During Hillary’s four-year stint as secretary of state, the ex-president earned about $48 million of a $105 million speaking haul amassed between 2001 and 2013.

More than half of the $48 million was paid by companies in China, Japan, Canada, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and the Cayman Islands, among others.

The author writes that “of the 13 Clinton speeches that fetched $500,000 or more, only two occurred during the years his wife was not secretary of state.”

Bill Clinton is believed to be the richest living ex-president and one of the 10 wealthiest ever.

Most estimates put the power couple’s combined net worth at $100 million to $200 million.
BILL CLINTON IS BELIEVED TO BE THE RICHEST LIVING EX-PRESIDENT AND ONE OF THE 10 WEALTHIEST EVER.
Some of the fees were paid at the Clintons’ request to their foundation — netting domestic donors a fat tax break. But most went directly to Bill, and the fees make up the family’s main source of income, The Washington Post reported.

Following Hillary’s decision to run for president, the foundation itself announced last week it would accept donations only from Australia, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Canada, Germany and Norway.

The 186-page book will go on sale May 5, but Hillary wasted no time dismissing it.

“We’re back into the political season and, therefore, we will be subjected to all kinds of distraction and attacks and I’m ready for that. I know that that comes, unfortunately, with the territory,” she said Monday in Keene, NH.

“It is, I think, worth noting that the Republicans seem to only be talking about me. I don’t know what they’d talk about if I wasn’t in the race, but I am in the race and hopefully we’ll get on to the issues,” she added.

Allison Moore, spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, responded by bringing up Hillary’s use of a private email account for official business and her deletion of thousands of emails

http://nypost.com/2015/04/20/book-cl...y-filthy-rich/

I will be very surprised if there is any way that Hillary can hold up under this scrutiny. Whether she actually made a "deal" for donations or whatever is really irrelevant to me. What matters more to me is the fact that they're involved at all in these 501 C 3 tax fraud "charities".

Pass the FairTax and Shut. Them. Down.

And Lois Lerner was where on this?

Originally Posted by Newmexican

And Lois Lerner was where on this?

Exactly, the same place she was on all 501 C 3 tax fraud "charities".

FairTax Now! Shut them down.

I have no intention of voting for Hilary or any democrat.

Why is the "charity watchdog" unnamed? Anonymous stories are worth very little, IMO.

Originally Posted by kevinssdad

I have no intention of voting for Hilary or any democrat.

Why is the "charity watchdog" unnamed? Anonymous stories are worth very little, IMO.

Good catch! The charity watchdog is Charity Navigator, according to American Thinker (newspaper editing has really lost its once great luster), and shame on the New York Post editing team for missing this important piece of information.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...atch_list.html

Originally Posted by Judy

Good catch! The charity watchdog is Charity Navigator, according to American Thinker (newspaper editing has really lost its once great luster), and shame on the New York Post editing team for missing this important piece of information.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...atch_list.html

Thanks, Judy, and thanks to Newmexican for getting that info so quickly. Since I am not familiar with Charity Navigator, now I've some self education to do, reckon?

Not only has newspaper editing lost its luster, as I hinted in the post about Constitutional Amendment, it seems that education has destroyed the King's English and/or the American language. People writing and speaking using double negatives while reporting or making speeches, how is one to know what they mean? (I won't even bring up what they didn't experience, Brian Williams, NBC) Oooops, I meant to leave him anonymous.. Aw, shucks.

Originally Posted by kevinssdad

Thanks, Judy, and thanks to Newmexican for getting that info so quickly. Since I am not familiar with Charity Navigator, now I've some self education to do, reckon?

Not only has newspaper editing lost its luster, as I hinted in the post about Constitutional Amendment, it seems that education has destroyed the King's English and/or the American language. People writing and speaking using double negatives while reporting or making speeches, how is one to know what they mean? (I won't even bring up what they didn't experience, Brian Williams, NBC) Oooops, I meant to leave him anonymous.. Aw, shucks.

Check with these folks before you give money to charity.

What can they really do to Hillary thou. Dem voters will ignore it as either they don't pay attention to politics at all or they will easily buy into the BS that its the GOP or tea party *crazies* creating this stuff. Congress will try and investigate but the Dems will keep it stuck up. The DOO (Department of Obama, formerly the Department of Justice) are the ones who would need to bring formal charges and we know Obama will never have that happen. So in the end the Dems will still vote for Hillary and any against her are racist, hateful, anti women liars. As usual the political elite class is above the law and will never see charges brought against them,