Latest

Clinton Foundation Admit 85% Of Donations Do Not Go To Charity

The business model of the Clintons is to stand between misery and the donor community and allow billions of dollars to get diverted.

What percentage of Clinton Foundation money goes to real and actual charities?

The Clinton Foundation is a giant vampire squid with its filaments wrapped around the world and its blood funnel jamming relentlessly into anything that smells like money. That’s OK, people say, it’s a charity. They might be right on paper, but make no mistake – the main beneficiaries of the Clinton Foundation are the Clintons.

What percentage of Clinton Foundation money goes to real and actual charities? If you define “actual charities not controlled by the Clintons” as “programmatic grants,” then it appears the number is 15%.

The Clinton Foundation argues the figure is much higher. They claim they hire their own staff to carry out humanitarian work, thus money that appears to be staying in the Foundation is actually being spent on charitable acts.

This unusual approach to charity has flummoxed Charity Navigator, one of the leading independent organizations that track charities. Charity Navigator has stopped giving the Clinton Foundation a charity ranking at all.

Where does the money go?

What are these in-house, expensive charities that suck up all this cash? The Federalist reported that “the two single largest ‘charitable’ initiatives of the Clinton Foundation — by its own admission — are the Clinton Presidential Library, which exists solely to put a positive spin on the 42nd president’s term in office, and the Clinton Global Initiative, which the New York Times characterized as a ‘glitzy annual gathering of chief executives, heads of state, and celebrities.'” If hanging out with celebrities and networking at glitzy dinners counts as charity, then it’s time to grant the Kardashian sisters tax-exempt status.

Unprosecuted charity fraud 

Charles Ortel, the investigator who uncovered the financial discrepancies at General Motors before its stock crashed, says the Clinton Foundation is “the largest unprosecuted charity fraud ever.”

The Foundation “isn’t organized lawfully and isn’t operating lawfully. There’s never been a legally compliant audit,” Ortel says of the Foundation raking in hundreds of millions of dollars per year.

The Post Gazette reports that Mr. Ortel has examined every public filing by the Clinton Foundation and its major donors and he’s found massive discrepancies between what the foundation claimed receiving and what donors say they gave.

For instance, between September 2006 and December 2008, the UNITAID global health consortium reported giving around $100 million more than the Clinton Foundation reported getting, Mr. Ortel says.

Predatory Humanitarianism

After a devastating earthquake in Haiti in 2010, Bill and Hillary Clinton controlled dispersal of more than $10 billion in aid funds. Very little of it ever got to the poor, noted Haitian journalist Dady Chery. She called Clinton disaster fund-raising “predatory humanitarianism.”

The business model of the Clintons is to stand between misery and the donor community and allow billions of dollars to get diverted,” Mr. Ortel said.

More than half the people outside government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave to the Clinton Foundation, the Associated Press reported Aug. 23. At least 85 of 154 from private interests donated as much as $156 million to the foundation, AP said.

Some large donors are foreigners with shadowy pasts, such as Lebanese businessman Gilbert Chagoury, who was denied entry to the U.S. last year because of suspicion of links to terrorism.

Sixteen foreign governments donated up to $170 million after their representatives had meetings with Secretary Clinton, the AP reported.

Why did the Saudi regime and other Gulf tyrannies donate millions to the Clinton Foundation?” wondered left-wing journalist Glenn Greenwald.

Clinton-controlled group events are “all about buying access,” Adam Davidson, host of NPR’s “Planet Money” show said.

Journalists expressed alarm about Donald Trump’s bromance with Russian leader Vladimir Putin and the megabucks his former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was paid to promote Mr. Putin’s stooge in Ukraine. They’ve given less attention to Team Clinton’s ties to the Kremlin. The Podesta Group, founded by Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and his brother Tony, lobbies for Russia’s biggest bank, which is “functionally an arm of the Kremlin,” said former counterintelligence officer John Schindler.

We should be especially concerned about Ms. Clinton’s role in the Skolkovo Innovation Center, established in 2009 as Russia’s answer to Silicon Valley, Mr. Schindler said.

Of the 28 U.S., European and Russian companies that participated in Skolkovo, 17 were Clinton Foundation donors or had hired former President Clinton to give speeches,” noted Peter Schweizer of the Government Accountability Institute.

Skolkovo is “a means for the Russian government to access our nation’s sensitive or classified research, development facilities and dual-use technologies with military and commercial applications,” said the FBI’s Boston field office.

It’s an obvious Kremlin front,” a Pentagon intelligence officer said.

Skolkovo has contracts with a Russian defense firm that builds armored vehicles. “The FBI fears that Kamaz will provide Russia’s military with innovative research obtained from the Foundation’s U.S. partners,” warned the bureau.

Exactly how Ms. Clinton profited off deals with Skolkovo — and how much — is something the American public has a right to know before Nov. 8,” Mr. Schindler said.

Baxter Dmitry
Follow me

Baxter Dmitry

Writer at Your News Wire
Passionate about motor sports, military history and the truth, Baxter has travelled in over 80 countries and won arguments in every single one.
Baxter Dmitry
Follow me
Baxter Dmitry
About Baxter Dmitry (457 Articles)
Passionate about motor sports, military history and the truth, Baxter has travelled in over 80 countries and won arguments in every single one.
  • Rick

    Where is “The Chronicle(s) of Philanthropy” in this discussion, have they offered an opinion regarding the Clinton Foundation?

  • sherrybb

    One of the most dishonest articles ever….Charity Watch has indeed given the Clinton foundation a rating, just 5 days before this article was written. On 9-1-2016, the Clinton Foundation was evaluated by Charity Watch and oh my….an excellent rating was given. When you use the fact that they did not rate the Foundation 2 yrs ago as a negative, and ignore that just 5 days earlier they received an excellent rating….this might be a partisan hack hit piece!!

  • Kyle

    I dislike the clintons too, but this article is completely false… https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=16680