How Do You Spell Apparent Fraud? The Clinton Foundation, Shady Accounting and AIDS

[boomerang]

The Clinton Foundation has until November 16 to amend more than ten years’ worth of state, federal and foreign filings, but it’s going to be virtually impossible to do so without acknowledging that it has engaged in massive accounting fraud since its inception

https://www.byline.com/project/27/article/520

This is one hell of an article. By all appearances, the Foundation is a swirling mass of corruption that was conceived to benefit the Clinton's and Foundation trustees. The Foundation has a history of taking in huge sums with minimal expenditures. In other words little escapes to do good in the world.

However, the problems appear set to catch up with the foundation (now formally known as the Bill, Hillary, & Chelsea Clinton Foundation), which has until November 16 to amend more than ten years’ worth of state, federal and foreign filings. According to Charles Ortel, a financial whistleblower, it will be difficult if not impossible for the foundation to amend its financial returns without acknowledging accounting fraud and admitting that it generated substantial private gain for directors, insiders and Clinton cronies, all of which is against the law under an IRS rule called inurement.

While inurement may sound obscure to the layman, it’s an ancient legal principle and the IRS is very clear that it is verboten. If you are familiar with it, it becomes immediately clear that Bill Clinton – and arguably Hillary and daughter Chelsea as family members and fellow Clinton Foundation trustees – could have big problems come November 16. So, too, could Clinton cronies like Ira Magaziner (see below) and Doug Band, a Clinton administration and former Foundation insider who subsequently became a founding partner of a bipartisan business swamp called Teneo Holdings.

In terms of Bill Clinton, consider that he received a $6.3 million to write his 2007 book “Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World,” about his philanthropic activities and he made countless dollars more to give speeches on the topic. Not a bad deal, though admittedly that’s probably a bit less than the roughly $128 million the Clinton Foundation says it spent on all program services between 2001 and 2006, which includes its spending to provide relief to victims of the Tsunami in Asia and of Hurricane Katrina. The same pattern of taking in vast sums from donors and spending far less to help victims has continued ever since.

Can Koskinen provide the same level of protection that Lois Lerner did? With calls for Koskinen's impeachment, it may be a challenge but surely not impossible within the confines of the Obama administration. I think how it goes will depend on how King Obama wishes it to go. He just might want one of these Foundations for his own self when he gets out of office.

 

[Jhhnn]

Standard application of Brandolini's law. More Benghazi.

 

[radhak]

Standard application of Brandolini's law. More Benghazi.

/thread

 

[Ham n' Eggs]

surely it is possible to investigate potential wrongdoing without reverting to mindless partisan bickering.

if it's fraud it's fraud.
if it's not fraud, it's not fraud.

republican/democrat/martian has got absolutely nothing to do with it
overt partisan finger-pointing only leads to mindlessness on both sides

 

[fskimospy]

surely it is possible to investigate potential wrongdoing without reverting to mindless partisan bickering.

if it's fraud it's fraud.
if it's not fraud, it's not fraud.

republican/democrat/martian has got absolutely nothing to do with it
overt partisan finger-pointing only leads to mindlessness on both sides

It's boomerang. He routinely comes in here dropping stories from ultra right wing websites and then refuses to talk about them with anyone who disagrees.

Considering his track record it's best to make fun of him and then ignore the rest. If his article has any actual merit it will appear in a more credible source. That being said, it most likely won't.

He's the ranting uncle at thanksgiving.

 

[Jhhnn]

surely it is possible to investigate potential wrongdoing without reverting to mindless partisan bickering.

if it's fraud it's fraud.
if it's not fraud, it's not fraud.

republican/democrat/martian has got absolutely nothing to do with it
overt partisan finger-pointing only leads to mindlessness on both sides

Please. Claiming fraud prior to proof of fraud is standard right wing propaganda. When proof of fraud fails to surface, that's then evidence of coverup.

It's aimed at the Birther/Benghazi headset.

The truth? I have no idea. I just recognize the methods for what they are.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Lets go all White Water on them. Investigate for year and find out someone parked illegally and told an FBI guy he didn't

Oh and BENGHAZI!

 

[Bitek]

Standard application of Brandolini's law. More Benghazi.

It's boomerang. He routinely comes in here dropping stories from ultra right wing websites and then refuses to talk about them with anyone who disagrees.

Considering his track record it's best to make fun of him and then ignore the rest. If his article has any actual merit it will appear in a more credible source. That being said, it most likely won't.

He's the ranting uncle at thanksgiving.

This has been predicted as the Bengahhhhzi! investigation stalled, and follows the same pattern of baseless and hysterical right wing attacks since 1992. After this one goes nowhere, another will take its place.

But I'm sure Boomers thinks they finally have something, this time.

 

[Bitek]

Did you figure out who murdered Vince Foster yet?

 

[fskimospy]

This has been predicted as the Bengahhhhzi! investigation stalled, and follows the same pattern of baseless and hysterical right wing attacks since 1992. After this one goes nowhere, another will take its place.

But I'm sure Boomers thinks they finally have something, this time.

Oh yes. If she becomes president I can only imagine the endless stream of these that we'll see.

I mean look at Obama. He's had basically the most scandal-free presidency...well... maybe ever, yet conservatives are firmly convinced that there are at least half a dozen conspiracies and scandals in his administration.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Sounds like a lot of other mainstream foundations / organizations: March of Dimes, Red Cross, UNICEF, Good Will.

 

[Bitek]

Oh yes. If she becomes president I can only imagine the endless stream of these that we'll see.

I mean look at Obama. He's had basically the most scandal-free presidency...well... maybe ever, yet conservatives are firmly convinced that there are at least half a dozen conspiracies and scandals in his administration.

I wonder sometimes if that's the actual strategy. They know nothing is true, but they just want to make things so horrible that voters will turn away from Clinton (or any dem really) just to make it stop.

 

[fskimospy]

I wonder sometimes if that's the actual strategy. They know nothing is true, but they just want to make things so horrible that voters will turn away from Clinton (or any dem really) just to make it stop.

I've actually heard someone advance exactly that argument, the Republicans have gone so nuts that it might be helpful to elect a Republican president just so they start behaving better and start actually attempting to govern.

That's of course a totally insane thing to do, as you're basically saying that we should pay off hostage takers. Sure you might get one hostage back, but as soon as they realize that's a winning strategy they will do it constantly. (for a great example, look at the debt ceiling debacle of 2011)

 

[boomerang]

surely it is possible to investigate potential wrongdoing without reverting to mindless partisan bickering.

if it's fraud it's fraud.
if it's not fraud, it's not fraud.

republican/democrat/martian has got absolutely nothing to do with it
overt partisan finger-pointing only leads to mindlessness on both sides

I see you haven't been here very long. The first rule of P&N is that Democrats can rarely do wrong while everything Republicans do is wrong.

Mindless partisan bickering defines it perfectly. You'll find no argument in this thread defending the Clinton's that has a basis in anything other than 'feelings'.

The immediate goal is to marginalize everything in regards to this story thereby effectively negating anything contained within it in the minds of the faithful followers. Hear no evil, see no evil. Speak no evil is of course the methodology behind the attempt to marginalize.

All entirely predictable from the usual cadre of faithful supporters.

 

[Eli]

Probably just realize it doesn't change anything.

If Carson wins the nomination, she should grow horns, start carrying a pitchfork and tattoo "666" across her forehead.

 

[DrPizza]

The Clinton Foundation has until November 16 to amend more than ten years’ worth of state, federal and foreign filings, but it’s going to be virtually impossible to do so without acknowledging that it has engaged in massive accounting fraud since its inception

Please, OP, explain how the hell someone other than an insider would know that it's engaging in massive accounting fraud? Or, an auditor. It's the equivalent of you declaring that I've hidden things behind the wall in my house - there's no way in hell you would know that, unless you or someone else has been in my house.

In other words, this is just a smear campaign, and without any evidence to support it, I think the thread should be locked as an unsubstantiated smear campaign.

 

[waggy]

surely it is possible to investigate potential wrongdoing without reverting to mindless partisan bickering.

if it's fraud it's fraud.
if it's not fraud, it's not fraud.

republican/democrat/martian has got absolutely nothing to do with it
overt partisan finger-pointing only leads to mindlessness on both sides

lol you are new here..

MOST here are dems so they are protected and have the biggest mouth pieces. That is not to say the GOP is lacking. no no. there are 3-4 that are just as insane. They will find anything that nails the dems and go without proof.

IF you want true political and news discussion sadly you won't find it with to many posters here.

I agree if it's fraud its fraud and it should be talked about. Though i would wait for more news and other post by more credible posters then boomerang.

 

[Jhhnn]

I see you haven't been here very long. The first rule of P&N is that Democrats can rarely do wrong while everything Republicans do is wrong.

Mindless partisan bickering defines it perfectly. You'll find no argument in this thread defending the Clinton's that has a basis in anything other than 'feelings'.

The immediate goal is to marginalize everything in regards to this story thereby effectively negating anything contained within it in the minds of the faithful followers. Hear no evil, see no evil. Speak no evil is of course the methodology behind the attempt to marginalize.

All entirely predictable from the usual cadre of faithful supporters.

The story is a string of innuendos, accusations & leaps of faith based on conjecture & a few scanty facts.

It's what you want to believe, so you do. If revised accounting reveals no malfeasance, you'll claim conspiracy & keep on believing.

Your mental faculties were poisoned long ago, benghazied before there was Benghazi. You lack intellectual defenses against emotionally appealing right wing agitprop & it shows.

 

[Hugo Drax]

This is Bengahzi all over, Clinton has done nothing wrong, its more GOP attacks to make her look bad.

 

[theeedude]

Republicans got their ass handed to them on Benghazi, but are signing up for more.

 

[shira]

I looked at the article linked in the OP. This was a claim near the top of that article:

For example, the New York Times just had a story on the Clinton Foundation that found highly questionable conduct but buried it under the bland headline, “Rwanda Aid Shows Reach and Limits of Clinton Foundation.”

Well, I found that NY Times story and read through it. Seems like the "highly questionable conduct" was the following:

In 2011, for instance, when Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state, leaders of the foundation’s health care arm lobbied her department to shift American aid dollars away from H.I.V. programs in Rwanda in order to fund a training program for health professionals that the foundation helped design. The proposed reallocation, a heavy bureaucratic lift in Washington, was approved over the objection of some State Department technical experts as well as foreign aid contractors that stood to lose money.

Mrs. Clinton had pledged to recuse herself if the Clinton Foundation ever had business before her department, and she steered clear of direct decision making. But mediating the dispute was her chief of staff, Cheryl D. Mills, a longtime counselor to both Clintons who had served for five years on the Clinton Foundation board before going to the State Department. Furthermore, the department’s top AIDS official said he had kept Mrs. Clinton apprised of the proposal and sought and received her backing before approving his portion of the deal. She then signed the overall budget that shifted the money.

But, honestly, how could some "overlap" NOT occur in a decision of this type? It wouldn't be fair to just reject out of hand the reallocation of funds simply because the Clinton Foundation was involved in the request, because the request might actually represent a better use of public money. So although I can understand that there wasn't a complete separation between - on the one hand - anyone with any history with the Clinton Foundation, and - on the other hand - the decision-maker at State, a more thorough reading of the situation (look further down in the NY Times article) makes pretty clear that there was no hanky-panky going on.

So to refer to this situation as "highly questionable conduct" is a gross distortion of what actually happened. And that in turn suggests that the article linked by the OP cannot be trusted.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Quote:




The Clinton Foundation has until November 16 to amend more than ten years’ worth of state, federal and foreign filings, but it’s going to be virtually impossible to do so without acknowledging that it has engaged in massive accounting fraud since its inception




https://www.byline.com/project/27/article/520

This is one hell of an article. By all appearances, the Foundation is a swirling mass of corruption that was conceived to benefit the Clinton's and Foundation trustees. The Foundation has a history of taking in huge sums with minimal expenditures. In other words little escapes to do good in the world.


Quote:




However, the problems appear set to catch up with the foundation (now formally known as the Bill, Hillary, & Chelsea Clinton Foundation), which has until November 16 to amend more than ten years’ worth of state, federal and foreign filings. According to Charles Ortel, a financial whistleblower, it will be difficult if not impossible for the foundation to amend its financial returns without acknowledging accounting fraud and admitting that it generated substantial private gain for directors, insiders and Clinton cronies, all of which is against the law under an IRS rule called inurement.

While inurement may sound obscure to the layman, it’s an ancient legal principle and the IRS is very clear that it is verboten. If you are familiar with it, it becomes immediately clear that Bill Clinton – and arguably Hillary and daughter Chelsea as family members and fellow Clinton Foundation trustees – could have big problems come November 16. So, too, could Clinton cronies like Ira Magaziner (see below) and Doug Band, a Clinton administration and former Foundation insider who subsequently became a founding partner of a bipartisan business swamp called Teneo Holdings.

In terms of Bill Clinton, consider that he received a $6.3 million to write his 2007 book “Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World,” about his philanthropic activities and he made countless dollars more to give speeches on the topic. Not a bad deal, though admittedly that’s probably a bit less than the roughly $128 million the Clinton Foundation says it spent on all program services between 2001 and 2006, which includes its spending to provide relief to victims of the Tsunami in Asia and of Hurricane Katrina. The same pattern of taking in vast sums from donors and spending far less to help victims has continued ever since.




Can Koskinen provide the same level of protection that Lois Lerner did? With calls for Koskinen's impeachment, it may be a challenge but surely not impossible within the confines of the Obama administration. I think how it goes will depend on how King Obama wishes it to go. He just might want one of these Foundations for his own self when he gets out of office.

So you have a woody for the Clintons???

 

[JEDIYoda]

So to refer to this situation as "highly questionable conduct" is a gross distortion of what actually happened. And that in turn suggests that the article linked by the OP cannot be trusted.

So it turns out the OP is the one with the highly questionable gross distortion of whats happening...ie-- woody for the Clintons!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

surely it is possible to investigate potential wrongdoing without reverting to mindless partisan bickering.

if it's fraud it's fraud.
if it's not fraud, it's not fraud.

republican/democrat/martian has got absolutely nothing to do with it
overt partisan finger-pointing only leads to mindlessness on both sides

Surely you have no clue....also nothing is ever that cut and dried when it comes to politics!!

 

[kage69]

I mean look at Obama. He's had basically the most scandal-free presidency...well... maybe ever, yet conservatives are firmly convinced that there are at least half a dozen conspiracies and scandals in his administration.

I've been enjoying how this has been making banana republican shills slowly lose their minds, or at least their self-respect (as OP and others have demonstrated repeatedly). They are bent on not letting the next president have such a smooth ride I guess.

I guess it's time for another string of pointless but time-consuming and expensive "hearings," I mean it's not like they have actual jobs and responsibilities or anything. What a joke!

How does it go? Republicans claim government is incompetent and ineffective, then they get elected and prove it.

If some laws have been broken, that's different, but this looks like more apparent desperation, delivered by the usual hacks who insist things are 'going critical' and 'exploding.' Same formula, different target. *yawn*