Clinton’s Questionable Benevolence

Townhall.com ^ | July 12, 2015 | Bruce Bialosky

[Kaslin]

Mother Teresa wants to build a charity. The first thing she does is call a meeting of influential people at a very expensive and exclusive French restaurant (La Grenouille in New York City). Most people would think that would set a tone for how the charity would be run. Of course, Mother Teresa would never do such a thing, but President Bill Clinton did in June 1999. Once you read this fact your intuition will tell you the rest of what followed from the Clinton Foundation as outlined by Peter Schweizer in Clinton Cash will quite often be questionable, but will not shock you.

Schweizer’s highly publicized and controversial book has been hard to miss. Not only has he been out pimping it regularly, but the mainstream media (New York Times and Washington Post) were provided materials and did their own research validating his findings.

Schweizer starts the book by presenting his credentials as an equal-opportunity basher of elected officials. His 2011 book Throw Them All Out gained significant publicity for detailing Congress’s questionable stock trades from both sides of the aisle. His 2013 book Extortion, about which I wrote, detailed the bipartisan glad-handing for political contributions based on their committee assignments.

This book then goes into a delineation of various questionable actions relating the activities of Mrs. Clinton as secretary of state, former President Clinton racking up millions in speaking fees, and The Clinton Foundation bringing in millions of donations from questionable parties from which the Clintons personally profited, not to mention the governmental actions taken that benefitted Clinton friends.

The most well-known case delineated in the book is about how a Clinton buddy and funder, Frank Giustra, was able to wedge himself into a uranium deal that lined his pockets with millions of dollars while feeding the Clinton Foundation with millions and Bill Clinton with huge fees through Giustra’s own checkbook and that of his affiliated business contacts. Of course, none of this matters because on June 10, 2015, former President Clinton told Bloomberg News “Has anyone proved we have done anything objectionable? No.” The Washington Post headlined that statement, stating this proves Clinton does not get it regarding the problems with the Clinton Foundation.

My favorite Clinton escapade has to do with Haiti. The disastrous earthquake that left 230,000 dead and nearly leveled the entire country was ripe for Clinton mischief. The statement that most captured my attention was the quote of what The Economist said, which is “The strange multi-dimensional role that Mr. Clinton as co-chair of the IHRC (Interim Haiti Recovery Commission), special UN envoy, former US president, spouse of the US secretary of state, and head of his own foundation which supports projects in the country, will continue to lead to confusion about for who he advocates and to whom he ultimately answers.” What could possibly go wrong there?

Every account asserts that Haiti is still in a disastrous state. No one can purport that anything could possibly make Haiti a functional place. It started as a poorly-run country so why would anyone expect that it would be a pristine place even after the huge international humanitarian effort? Yet the details of Clinton cronyism and the disappointing results stagger even the most skeptical reader.

What really got me thinking the most was whether there was any graft in the various different donations to the Clinton Foundation from foreign parties who wanted Clinton influence on public policy. The thought that came to mind is that I have rarely, if ever, encountered anyone who made charitable contributions without wanting to get full benefit of the tax deduction. Anyone who doubts the tax benefit is a major motivating factor should study the reaction of 501 (c) 3 charities any time the U.S. Congress even whispers about limiting the tax deductibility of their contributions.

Why then did all these foreign individuals and entities (not governments) make their contributions to an American charity? I do not know all the applicable tax laws from their nations so it is possible there were some local tax benefits. But that is highly unlikely. We are focusing on the many six- or seven- figure donations. A cynic would jump to conclusions that the quid pro quos outlined by Schweizer were the real motivation. You can draw your own conclusion.

As I wrote before, this entire matter is tawdry and it is certainly possible there are some illegalities. Whether the mainstream press will devote the resources to obtain a smoking gun and someone comes clean is still up for grabs. Schweizer has done a great service. Even if nothing goes further from his research, my question is why would Americans want four or possibly eight more years of this circus?

[Dante3]

Good article.

[loveliberty2]

Nothing "questionable" about the Clintons' so-called "benevolence"--either when they are holding pubic office, or, through their Foundation's activities.

There is nothing "benevolent" or "compassionate" about using America's laws to "take" the earnings of some citizens in order to buy votes and power from other citizens with those "taken" dollars.

Years ago, Dr. Thomas Sowell made an observation that the so-called "vision" of the liberals sounds good, but the results of implementation of that "vision" are not those promised and lead, instead, to dependency and enslavement--not a benevolent good.

America's Founders understood such power-hungry individuals and their less-than-benevolent motives, as was clearly articulated by John Adams in his letter to Thomas Jefferson, February 2, 1816:

"Power always thinks it has a great soul, and vast views, beyond the comprehension of the weak; and that it is doing God service, when it is violating all His laws. Our passions, ambition, avarice, love, resentment, etc., possess so much metaphysical subtlety, and so much overpowering eloquence, that they insinuate themselves into the understanding and the conscience, and convert both to their party." - John Adams letter to Thomas Jefferson, Feb. 2, 1816

In his TownHall piece, Bialosky states: "The disastrous earthquake that left 230,000 dead and nearly leveled the entire country was ripe for Clinton mischief. The statement that most captured my attention was the quote of what The Economist said, which is 'The strange multi-dimensional role that Mr. Clinton as co-chair of the IHRC (Interim Haiti Recovery Commission), special UN envoy, former US president, spouse of the US secretary of state, and head of his own foundation which supports projects in the country, will continue to lead to confusion about for who he advocates and to whom he ultimately answers.' What could possibly go wrong there?"

John Adams' words described almost perfectly the pair of individuals whose access to power has enabled them to "insinuate themselves" in such misleading and insidious ways into America's national life.

[Graybeard58]

“The strange multi-dimensional role that Mr. Clinton as co-chair of the IHRC (Interim Haiti Recovery Commission), special UN envoy, former US president, spouse of the US secretary of state, and head of his own foundation which supports projects in the country, will continue to lead to confusion about for who he advocates and to whom he ultimately answers.”

******************************************************************

And Bush Sr. willingly attached his name to this travesty.

[Liz]

In more than one news report.....the deceptive Clintons defended their foundation’s work by saying that its focus has always been on "charity." “We and our supporters care only about impact, not ideology,” Bill Clinton said in a written statement. “We are an entirely non-political foundation.”

However, the foundation teems w/ key members of Hillary’s political gofers and has been disparagingly referred to as "Hillary's 2016 Super-Pac." The Foundation appears to use the charity and its enormous resources as a revolving door to shuffle Clintons political factotums from manning political operations.....into the charity......then back into politics.

==================================================

In 2009, the Clintons duped the public, and its wealthy donors. (and contravened tax-exempt laws) by announcing Sidney Blumenthal, a long-time adviser to both Clintons, had been hired...... (wait for it) "to work on a project to promote Bill Clinton’s presidential legacy. "

(waiting for hysterical laughter to die down)

But Sid's secret emails show that, while on the foundation payroll, ostensibly promoting Bill's legacy, Blumenthal fed back-channel, usually unreliable, intelligence reports on Libya to then-Secy of State Clinton.

Hillary sent Sid's reports on to senior State official without attribution......as if they were her analyses.

The NYT reports extensively on Blumenthal's secret emails to Hillary (emails she did not want revealed).

=====================================================

LATER NEWS REPORTS SAY---Pricewaterhouse Coopers accountants retained by the Clintons failed to report the Clinton Foundation’s apparent massive diversions of funds from a HIV/AIDS global charity.

THIS IS MAIL FRAUD Raising money for a specific cause that was diverted elsewhere is considered mail fraud. The Postal Inspector has locked up many crooks for using similar scams.

REPORT MAIL FRAUD HERE:
https://postalinspectors.uspis.gov/contactUs/filecomplaint.aspx

[Liz]

At first glance, the Clinton’s astounding honoraria and humongous Foundation donations seem to provide the bulk of the couple’s income.

Bill's honoraria increased dramatically---earning some $50 million during Hillary's four-year term as secretary of State....including an Irish scholarship fund, a Korean conglomerate, and, a Nigerian newspaper company......each of whom paid Clinton more than half a million dollars for a single speech.

The Wash/Post reports Hillary earned $11.7 million for 51 speeches since Jan 2014.....she pocketed an astonishing $625,000 for two speeches in one day!

I firmly believe the Clinton Foundation's gigantic donor list, and their astonishing blizzard of speaking honoraria, are a smoke screen for their secret wealth----and the way they make billions sub rosa---intertwining their vaunted "charity" work and public office.

The calculated Clintons have sought to branch out into other business activities......though little is known about the exact nature and financial worth of Bill and Hillary’s non-speech business interests.

Recent reports indicate the Clintons were party to multi-billion dollar Mideast arms deals....Kazakhstan uranium mines....and Haitian gold mines...oil deals....telecom businesses, financial powerhouses like Teneo, Goldman Sachs.....etc etc etc.

THE CON ARTIST CLINTONS GRABBED EVERYTHNG THAT WASNT NAILED DOWN---Lucrative business interests were cunningly intertwined w/ the Foundation's "do-good" activities....enabled by Hillary's catbird seat at the State Dept.

At last count the Clintons apparently raised $2billion from their foundation activities and their political campaigns.....

.....does not include monies flowing in from the various lucrative business ventures, interest accrued, safe deposit boxes, real estate assets, passive income on which they pay no taxes, income from Chelsea's hubby's hedge fund, monies invested in Goldman Sachs, interest in financial powerhouse Teneo..... etc etc etc.......

They are worth a bundle.....accumulated in record time.

[Liz]

Obama puts on a convincing act---he "knows nothing."
Obama didn't even know about this (snix).

Circa 2010--Ex-Pres Clinton in Moscow having a laugh w/ Putin.
as strategic US uranium deposits were sold off to Russia for Big Bucks.

Do you actually believe:

<><>Obama was oblivious to the Clintons jerking around US foreign policy?

<><> Obama knew nothing of Hillary and Sid Blumenthal's emails WRT Iran (the man Obama banned from US govt employment)?

<><> Obama knew nothing about the Clinton Foundation/slush fund buck-raking activities?

<><> Obama never noticed Bill Clinton trotting around the globe?

<><> Obama never noticed the Clinton "charity" used to worm his way into the confidences of foreign leaders....
but only those leaders w/ untapped reserves of gold, uranium, oil, and other valuable commodities?

================================================

THE FACTS ARE THESE---WE, THE PEOPLE, NOTICED Hand-picked by Obama to run State, Hillary ran it like a shadow govt....w/ her husband taking notes WRT buck-raking opportunities available from Hillary's actions OR inaction.

Obama never noticed that Secy Hillary never e-v-e-r uttered a discouraging word e-v-e-r......as the Clinton Foundation sucked up hundred of millions of foreign dollars from shady characters. The avaricious Clintons devised hundreds of obscure programs to collect billions.....bragging about do-goodism, how the money was supposedly dispersed to "assist" endless charitable projects.

No question----Obama's protecting the Clintons---b/c they're his meal ticket. The Clintons deposit Obama's cut into his two (cough) "foundations." All of them are living happily ever after--getting rich on other people's misfortune