Concentrating on Clinton Foundation Facts

The attached Executive Summary continues an investigation into the Clinton Foundation public record begun, by chance, in February 2015.

Since then, questions have started to swirl around the various entities that comprise what I call the Clinton Charity Network: a group of entities supported by a variety of donors from inside the United States and around the world.

Beginning today, and regularly thereafter, numerous detailed Exhibits will examine the known public record of the Clinton Charity Network within the context of applicable state, federal, and foreign laws.

The next Exhibit, Exhibit 1, is scheduled to follow the Executive Summary late on 7 September 2016.

To the extent feasible, comments and suggestions made via this website will be returned by email.

Go to Source

Author: Charles Ortel

A Deep Dive into How the Clinton Foundation Operates Illegally and in Haiti

State, federal, and foreign laws bar public charities from being run for private gain in interstate commerce—which means, by using the mail, telephones or the internet. The Clinton Foundation’s complex operations (it is not just one entity but a web of them) do not comply with this requirement. Nor does the Clinton Foundation ever seem to have submitted its financial records to an independent, properly certified audit by a qualified accounting firm.

Overall I consider the Clinton Foundation to be a charity fraud network. I base this conclusion on my review of extensive data about its operations including the activities of the Clinton family and their friends in Haiti, a nation that has suffered many disasters, both natural and manmade.

What possesses powerful, wealthy, and educated persons to prey on the most desperately poor humans on earth as they posture as “philanthropists”?  And why has there been no government oversight?

Expect an increased flow of detailed disclosures centering upon Exhibits 1 through 40 through this website, and continued reaction to breaking developments via my twitter account (@CharlesOrtel).

Go to Source

Author: Charles Ortel

Charles Ortel

From beginnings in the state of Arkansas in 1997, the Clinton Foundation quickly grew to become a sprawling international organization after 2001, despite the fact that this tax-exempt entity was only authorized to serve as a facility devoted to the study of Bill Clinton’s tenure as president of the United States.

Especially from 2001 onward, state, federal, and foreign governments have never regulated material defects in many Clinton Foundation public disclosures. Material deficiencies exist in documents ranging from filings from applications before the I.R.S., to registrations before U.S. state and foreign governments, to annual reports required in numerous legal jurisdictions.


From January 2001 through January 2009, when apparent unauthorized and illegal activities began and first escalated, Republicans were in control of the Executive Branch and had substantial influence in the House of Representatives, and in the Senate.

Was a decision reached in this period to give the Clinton Foundation free reign to operate outside any effective governmental controls–if so, by whom?

Since January 2009, even though Republicans held reduced influence within the federal government, many have held authority to investigate and to prosecute manifest unauthorized and illegal operating and fundraising activities of the Clinton Foundation.

Still, and even after multiple public and private warnings, no progress has resulted in attempting to bring the Clinton Foundation into compliance with strict U.S. state and federal laws.

So, perhaps we must rely on foreign government authorities to investigate obvious discrepancies in Clinton Foundation filings with records of major donors.

Please read the attached Executive Summary and then join with me, and with other citizens who believe that all public charities must be operated in strict compliance with applicable laws.

No individual stands above the law. And no person, not even a leading candidate for president of the United States is “too big to jail”, because government authorities and the major U.S. political parties are too conflicted to protect inherent interests of “we, the people”.