Harpers: Clintons have used their foundation for crass profiteering and influence peddling

[EdwardBernays]

Before anyone reports me the title is a direct quote from the VERY LIBERAL Harpers magazine.

Here it is in context:

After endless delays and excuses, the Clinton Foundation released its 2014 tax return as well as amended returns for the previous four years and an audit of its finances. That fulfilled a pledge made last April by Clinton Foundation acting CEO, Maura Pally, who acknowledged that the foundation had previously made a few unfortunate accounting “mistakes.”

Journalists are going to be scouring through this new financial information and pumping out “balanced” stories that evade what is already evident, namely that the  Clintons have used their foundation for crass profiteering and influence peddling

Heres one more paragraph:

"If the Justice Department and law enforcement agencies do their jobs, the foundation will be closed and its current and past trustees, who include Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton, will be indicted. That’s because their so-called charitable enterprise has served as a vehicle to launder money and to enrich Clinton family friends."

The article is a few months old but well worth a read if you missed it previously.

https://harpers.org/blog/2015/11/shaky-foundations/

[djean111]

1. I wish that was in the least little bit surprising. I really do. n/t

[EdwardBernays]

2. Exactly

I to wish that.

[cantbeserious]

3. CFEE

eom

[bahrbearian]

4. Took me awhile

[snagglepuss]

7. LOL Brilliant but it took me while!

[Jarqui]

5. So the party that railed against Reagan and Iran Contra is supporting

the candidate whose foundation collected millions from parties doing $165 billion in arms deals while on the candidate's approving watch as Secretary of State.

In years gone by, this would seem to be disqualifying, conflict of interest behavior by a candidate for the Oval Office.

In 2016, the mainstream media seems to generally advocate we're supposed to look the other way ... "Move along. Nothing to see here!!" And the majority blindly follow their lead right into the voting booth ....

Strange times indeed.

[EdwardBernays]

6. Hypocrisy aka

The Third Way.

It's not a surprise though as the media is often mo more than a mouth piece for PR firms. And her campaign manager owns a massive lobbying/PR firm.

[Jarqui]

8. Of course, we have dead heads like this to obscure the observation:

It’s Time for Hillary Clinton to Concede the Democratic Nomination to Bernie Sanders by H. A. Goodman

[BernieforPres2016]

9. Thanks for the link

Here's a link to a Bloomberg article on Frank Giustra that also addresses concerns about the Clinton Foundation.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-05-07/the-billionaire-whose-clinton-foundation-ties-could-be-trouble-for-hillary-clinton

<Although the Clinton Foundation signed an agreement with the White House to disclose its donors as a condition of her becoming secretary of state, it hasn't fulfilled the pledge. A New York Times investigation of Giustra's uranium mining deal turned up donors whom the Clinton Foundation failed to disclose. Bloomberg found an additional 1,100 undisclosed foreign donors. The Boston Globe turned up even more.>

<The potential conflicts of interest are nearly limitless—and so is the potential for political damage. According to a study by Vox, a news and policy analysis website, 181 contributors to the Clinton Foundation also lobbied the State Department while Hillary Clinton ran it. >

Crooks. Grifters.

[EdwardBernays]

10. if you haven't read this...

you should:

http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187

[BernieforPres2016]

11. Thanks, I had read that previously.

I wish we still had the kind of free press that would demand answers on this issue. But there really aren't any acceptable answers. It is a complete lack of ethics and appreciation of the concept of conflict of interest by the Clintons. In my opinion they should be in jail for this. The Secretary of State was effectively collecting commissions on the sale of arms to foreign governments that her office approved.

[EdwardBernays]

12. yep

but the thing is, the press in america is essentially commercial and for sale to the highest bidder... that's how PR people make a living... and hey ho, isn't it lucky that the owner of one of DC's largest lobbying/PR firms is her campaign chairman... their clients include Boeing, big pharma, and - of course - Saudi Arabia...

vomit.

[Gwhittey]

19. " I wish we still had the kind of free press that would demand answers on this issue."

We do it is all on internet.

[BernieforPres2016]

22. No, I mean demand answers and get them

Or run front page stories on it every day until answers are forthcoming. Like the Washington Post during Watergate.

Who is demanding the list of contributors to the Clinton Foundation that Hillary Clinton promised to the Obama administration when she became Secretary of State? Has that question ever been asked by a journalist in a debate or town hall? Has there been a story about it this year in the mainstream press?

Hillary Clinton should have been knocked out of the race for the Presidency on this issue alone.

[leveymg]

16. "An additional 1,100 undisclosed foreign donors" ignored by the MSM

Have to admit, haven't heard Charlie Rose say a word about that.

[SoapBox]

21. Oh gag...

And in the middle of stuff too was Ron Burkle? Good grief...the cast of characters skeezing with Slick Bullhorn Willy is disgusting.

[farleftlib]

13. The Clintons are scam artists

and I wish they'd go away. This scandal (and it is a big scandal) reminds me of the Savings and Loan debacle that occurred when GHWB became president and was swept under the carpet. No wonder she's scheming and cheating her way into the WH. I hope this blows up in her face and she has to face justice. Enough with the criminal dynasties in this country. Elect Bernie Sanders.

[slipslidingaway]

14. knr nt

[sorechasm]

15. If Price Waterhouse is concerned about their reputation, why aren't the politicians that support

The Clinton's? If the Clinton's are found to be guilty of any of these accusations, won't it reflect badly upon these politicians? Won't these politicians go by the way of Arthur Anderson.

PwC is a top firm and they will not be able to claim they didn’t know that the past audits were fraudulent because they have been informed of problems. If they certify that the Clinton Foundation is clean, when it is apparent it is not, PwC is done. It may go the way of Arthur Andersen.” Ortel, a former managing director of Dillon, Read & Co., who helped expose massive financial fraud by GE, GM, and AIG before the 2008 global financial meltdown, was referring to the accounting firm that missed massive fraud by Enron and subsequently collapsed.

I can think of several politicians who might fit that category: 'then they're done!'

[leveymg]

17. "Then they're done"? More like twice cooked books.

Financial defense lawyers, and we're supposed to take their word that all is squeaky clean?

[EdwardBernays]

18. c'mere

it's the same with every one of these schemes of crooked politicians... they lie and lie and lie up to the exact moment they're forced to come clean... and if that means crashing the bus into a wall, then that means crashing the bus into a wall...

[SoapBox]

20. Wow...sleazy.

And even more sleazy than I ever thought...they are up to their eyeballs in it.

There is lots to be amazed about but this struck me,

"A Canadian charity called the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership—which is run by one of Bill Clinton’s close friends, Frank Giustra—has been moving significant sums of money into the Clinton Foundation’s flagship in New York. There’s no way for the public to know precisely how much total money the CGEP has taken in over the years—or how much it has forwarded on to the Clinton Foundation—because, unlike in the United States, under Canadian non-profit law charities don’t need to report donors to tax authorities. Earlier this year, after being severely criticized by the Canadian press, the CGEP released the names of twenty-four of its donors, but more than 1,000 are still unknown. (CGEP wrote in an email that “going forward [it] will publicly disclose all future donors.”)"

Even in Canada, eh?

[EdwardBernays]

23. Giustra

is a big part of the scam IMO

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0