Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Skwmom

(12,685 posts)
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:20 AM Mar 2016

Clinton Foundation failed to disclose 1,100 foreign donations. So much for transparency

The reason this is a politically explosive revelation is because the Clinton Foundation promised to disclose its donors as a condition of Hillary Clinton becoming secretary of state. Shortly after Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, the Clinton Foundation signed a “memorandum of understanding” with the Obama White House agreeing to reveal its contributors every year. The agreement stipulates that the “Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative” (as the charity was then known) is part of the Clinton Foundation and must follow “the same protocols.”

It hasn’t.

Giustra says that’s because Canada’s federal privacy law forbids CGEP, a Canadian-registered charity, from revealing its donors. A memo he provided explaining the legal rationale cites CGEP’s “fiduciary obligations” to its contributors and Canada’s Personal Information Privacy and Electronic Disclosure Act. “We are not allowed to disclose even to the Clinton Foundation the names of our donors,” he says.

On Saturday, responding to the Times story, Maura Pally, the acting CEO of the Clinton Foundation, issued a statement echoing this assertion: “This is hardly an effort on our part to avoid transparency–unlike in the U.S., under Canadian law, all charities are prohibited from disclosing individual donors without prior permission from each donor.”

Also on Bloomberg Politics: The Definitive Hillary Clinton Scouting Report, by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann

Canadian tax and privacy law experts were dubious of this claim. Len Farber, former director of tax policy at Canada's Department of Finance, said he wasn't aware of any tax laws that would prevent the charity from releasing its donors' names. "There's nothing that would preclude them from releasing the names of donors," he said. "It's entirely up to them."

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-04-29/clinton-foundation-failed-to-disclose-1-100-foreign-donations

How shocking that Clinton's Cheerleader didn't raise this issue.

56 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Clinton Foundation failed to disclose 1,100 foreign donations. So much for transparency (Original Post) Skwmom Mar 2016 OP
Al Capone wouldn't tell where he stashed his loot, either... islandmkl Mar 2016 #1
No, but he did wind up in Alcatraz. highprincipleswork Apr 2016 #51
A Preview Of A HRC Administration cantbeserious Mar 2016 #2
Failed to disclose 1100, how many weapons deals did she sign off on after a juicy donation? peacebird Mar 2016 #3
Sanders is under FEC investigation for foreign donations, you know. CalvinballPro Mar 2016 #4
The Washington Free Beacon? pinebox Mar 2016 #5
How about the Burlington Free Press? OKIsItJustMe Mar 2016 #12
There ya go! pinebox Mar 2016 #13
Bernie will have to return the illegal donations. Bernie got "caught" because all NCjack Mar 2016 #16
He has had massive donations including crashing the system more than once. If there bkkyosemite Mar 2016 #28
Appearances can be deceiving. GeorgeGist Mar 2016 #42
I've told that to people and they laugh. They see thorugh the b.s. n/t Skwmom Mar 2016 #24
What was your previously banned screen name, again? morningfog Mar 2016 #39
Posting articles from a year ago to make it look like it is new. hrmjustin Mar 2016 #6
Not sure why that makes it irrevelant pinebox Mar 2016 #14
Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2016 #18
You said it pinebox Mar 2016 #20
Why? Is there a statute of limitations on Hillary's corruption? nt nichomachus Mar 2016 #43
I'd bet at least one is Saudi Arabia VulgarPoet Mar 2016 #7
Hillary's State Dept approved $165 billion of arms sales to foreign govts who had donated BernieforPres2016 Mar 2016 #17
This is how the world of Shadowrun becomes a reality. VulgarPoet Mar 2016 #21
is the Sixth Sun rising, or is it setting? MisterP Mar 2016 #48
Rising; but still capable of being stopped. VulgarPoet Apr 2016 #53
it might be closer to Gene Wolfe: either the sun goes out ahead of schedule, MisterP Apr 2016 #56
According to a Harper's article, Kuwait & UAE indeed contributed through the Canadian affiliate leveymg Mar 2016 #34
Missing from the story is how many donations total were involved. randome Mar 2016 #8
So if they only lied about and hid a small percentage of donations it's OK? Scuba Mar 2016 #9
I'm saying if it's a small number, it could be related more to accounting than deception. randome Mar 2016 #10
So just muddying the waters, eh? Hillary's campaign has not earned the benefit of the doubt. Scuba Mar 2016 #11
Meh ... another hit piece fail n/t cosmicone Mar 2016 #15
Nothing much sticks to Teflon Hillary in the eyes of her followers huh? revbones Mar 2016 #27
Only the devotees of Unicorn J. Sparklepony think anything sticks cosmicone Mar 2016 #30
Oh good one. Saying only a few care about integrity and corruption revbones Mar 2016 #36
Gee. That could explain why there was no permanent Inspector General at State during those years. Octafish Mar 2016 #19
BINGO! What an astute observation. Skwmom Mar 2016 #25
She kept the post empty for FOUR YEARS? IdaBriggs Mar 2016 #29
yes grasswire Apr 2016 #50
Seriously, we need an FAQ in English for this stuff - IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #52
Can't imagine why Obama let her allow that. grasswire Apr 2016 #54
Not just an abstract concern. US law requires foundations reveal all foreign income - it didn't > leveymg Mar 2016 #32
With so much special interest cash flowing in, perhaps it was just an oversight? nt NorthCarolina Mar 2016 #22
constant quid pro quo, in violation of all ethical and legal guidelines amborin Mar 2016 #23
IT'S HER TURN, DAMN IT!!! PonyUp Mar 2016 #26
LOL. Hillary smears from a year ago. The desperation is strong. DanTex Mar 2016 #31
And what global charitable organization has Mr. Humanity Sanders founded ? Trust Buster Mar 2016 #33
But...but... randome Mar 2016 #35
Bernie hasn't founded a slush fund-slash-money washing organization. frylock Mar 2016 #37
That's pathetic. The Clinton Foundatiin has earned world acclaim for it's life saving efforts Trust Buster Mar 2016 #38
Yep. It's a perfect front for those grifters to wash money. frylock Mar 2016 #40
It spends six percent of its income on "life saving efforts" nichomachus Mar 2016 #44
You are incorrect. Why do Sanders supporters hate so much ? Trust Buster Mar 2016 #46
Maybe things like this are the reason Hillary isn't trusted All in it together Mar 2016 #41
No, if you don't trust Hillary, you're a sexist nichomachus Mar 2016 #45
Clinton and Transparency is an oxymoron. EndElectoral Mar 2016 #47
Kick azmom Mar 2016 #49
it's all about secrecy---b/c there's a lot to hide amborin Apr 2016 #55

peacebird

(14,195 posts)
3. Failed to disclose 1100, how many weapons deals did she sign off on after a juicy donation?
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:41 AM
Mar 2016

THAT is what I want to know. It would be one thing if all these foreign govts had been donating like amounts BEFORE she was nominated to be SoS.....

 

CalvinballPro

(1,019 posts)
4. Sanders is under FEC investigation for foreign donations, you know.
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:45 AM
Mar 2016
http://freebeacon.com/politics/feds-flag-thousands-of-illegal-bernie-sanders-contributions/

The campaign’s January financial disclosure filing listed contributions from foreign nationals and unregistered political committees, the FEC said. Other contributions came from donors who exceeded the $2,700 per-election limit.


But it's OK when Bernie does it, right? Because hypocrisy is your new progressive platform, as far as I can tell.
 

pinebox

(5,761 posts)
5. The Washington Free Beacon?
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:48 AM
Mar 2016

Just a FYI but I would watch your sources before you get raked over the coals for posting links to RW sites, which WFB certainly is.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)
12. How about the Burlington Free Press?
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 09:33 AM
Mar 2016
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/politics/2016/02/26/feds-flag-bernie-sanders-campaign-contributions/80985898/
[font face=Serif][font size=5]Feds flag Bernie Sanders campaign contributions[/font]

Emilie Teresa Stigliani, Free Press Staff Writer 12:58 p.m. EST March 1, 2016

[font size=3]Bernie Sanders received a warning from the Federal Election Commission, citing problems with his campaign's February finance report.

The letter states the report lists amounts of contributions, receipts, expenses and disbursements that "appear to be incorrect."

The letter also cites possible impermissible contributions that exceed the allowed limit per election cycle ($2,700 for individuals) along with donations that come from outside the United States and from unregistered political committees.

The FEC sent the letter Thursday to the campaign asking for more information regarding the report filed Feb. 20. The letter warned: "Failure to adequately respond by the response date noted above could result in an audit or enforcement action."

…[/font][/font]

NCjack

(10,279 posts)
16. Bernie will have to return the illegal donations. Bernie got "caught" because all
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 10:02 AM
Mar 2016

the names, etc. of his donors are on his FEC submissions. Hillary gets money that passes thru a Canadian "money washing machine" -- original donors are not reported to FEC. So, I'm making a legal donation to his campaign now to help replace the money being returned.

bkkyosemite

(5,792 posts)
28. He has had massive donations including crashing the system more than once. If there
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:10 AM
Mar 2016

are errors they will be corrected. This is apples and oranges re: Hillary and her dishonest dealings and YUGGGEE amounts of donations that were overwhelming to say the least for Bernie.

 

pinebox

(5,761 posts)
14. Not sure why that makes it irrevelant
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 09:35 AM
Mar 2016

Who cares how old it is? Is it relevant to this election? Yup.

Response to pinebox (Reply #14)

VulgarPoet

(2,872 posts)
7. I'd bet at least one is Saudi Arabia
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:52 AM
Mar 2016

y'know, just keeping the good old American tradition of financially sleeping with our enemies alive.

BernieforPres2016

(3,017 posts)
17. Hillary's State Dept approved $165 billion of arms sales to foreign govts who had donated
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 10:04 AM
Mar 2016

to the Clinton Foundation.

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

<Even by the standards of arms deals between the United States and Saudi Arabia, this one was enormous. A consortium of American defense contractors led by Boeing would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to the United States' oil-rich ally in the Middle East.

Israeli officials were agitated, reportedly complaining to the Obama administration that this substantial enhancement to Saudi air power risked disrupting the region's fragile balance of power. The deal appeared to collide with the State Department’s documented concerns about the repressive policies of the Saudi royal family.

But now, in late 2011, Hillary Clinton’s State Department was formally clearing the sale, asserting that it was in the national interest. At press conferences in Washington to announce the department’s approval, an assistant secretary of state, Andrew Shapiro, declared that the deal had been “a top priority” for Clinton personally. Shapiro, a longtime aide to Clinton since her Senate days, added that the “U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army have excellent relationships in Saudi Arabia.”

These were not the only relationships bridging leaders of the two nations. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contributed at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, the philanthropic enterprise she has overseen with her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Just two months before the deal was finalized, Boeing -- the defense contractor that manufactures one of the fighter jets the Saudis were especially keen to acquire, the F-15 -- contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to a company press release.>

And of course, the Hillary and the Clinton Foundation didn't just collect from foreign governments, they also collected ample commissions from Boeing and other defense contractors for facilitating sales. And we know from the debates that Hillary champions the Bank of Boeing, otherwise known as the Export-Import Bank.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/for-hillary-clinton-and-boeing-a-beneficial-relationship/2014/04/13/21fe84ec-bc09-11e3-96ae-f2c36d2b1245_story.html

On a trip to Moscow early in her tenure as secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton played the role of international saleswoman, pressing Russian government officials to sign a multibillion-dollar deal to buy dozens of aircraft from Boeing.

A month later, Clinton was in China, where she jubilantly announced that the aerospace giant would be writing a generous check to help resuscitate floundering U.S. efforts to host a pavilion at the upcoming World’s Fair.

Boeing, she said, “has just agreed to double its contribution to $2 million.”

Clinton did not point out that, to secure the donation, the State Department had set aside ethics guidelines that first prohibited solicitations of Boeing and then later permitted only a $1 million gift from the company. Boeing had been included on a list of firms to be avoided because of its frequent reliance on the government for help negotiating overseas business and concern that a donation could be seen as an attempt to curry favor with U.S. officials.>


Ethics guidelines? We don't need no stinkin' ethics guidelines!

How is all of this anything but bribery?



VulgarPoet

(2,872 posts)
21. This is how the world of Shadowrun becomes a reality.
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:01 AM
Mar 2016

Minus all the things that made Shadowrun cool. (I'd vote for a dragon if he were running.)

VulgarPoet

(2,872 posts)
53. Rising; but still capable of being stopped.
Fri Apr 1, 2016, 09:06 AM
Apr 2016

If Hillary or a repub gets in, I want the dragons to come like immediately.

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
56. it might be closer to Gene Wolfe: either the sun goes out ahead of schedule,
Fri Apr 1, 2016, 12:36 PM
Apr 2016

or a white hole gets tossed into it and the Urth floods!

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
34. According to a Harper's article, Kuwait & UAE indeed contributed through the Canadian affiliate
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:21 AM
Mar 2016

and that pass-through wasn't reported by the Clinton Foundation in violation of federal tax law:

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

One money-laundering expert and former intelligence officer based in the Middle East who had access to the foundation’s confidential banking information told me that members of royal families in Middle Eastern countries, including Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates, have donated money to the CGEP that has then been sluiced through to the Clinton Foundation. . . There are other signs that the Clintons and their foundation may have violated federal, state, and international law. Under Treasury Department money-laundering rules, the Clinton Foundation is required to disclose every financial account it holds abroad. It has failed to disclose an account linked to the CGEP on its past eight tax returns.
 

randome

(34,845 posts)
8. Missing from the story is how many donations total were involved.
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 08:56 AM
Mar 2016

But that might provide context, and we can't have that, can we?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)
[/center][/font][hr]

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
10. I'm saying if it's a small number, it could be related more to accounting than deception.
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 09:20 AM
Mar 2016

And just because Canada has a law forbidding donors being revealed isn't much of a 'crime', from what I can see.

Although obviously there is some disagreement on whether it's prohibited or not.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)
[/center][/font][hr]

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
11. So just muddying the waters, eh? Hillary's campaign has not earned the benefit of the doubt.
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 09:22 AM
Mar 2016
 

revbones

(3,660 posts)
27. Nothing much sticks to Teflon Hillary in the eyes of her followers huh?
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:09 AM
Mar 2016

Can lead a horse to water, can't make them drink. You can show the truth, can't make people see it...

 

cosmicone

(11,014 posts)
30. Only the devotees of Unicorn J. Sparklepony think anything sticks
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:11 AM
Mar 2016

in their devotional echo-chamber.

The rest of the world doesn't care and moves on.

 

revbones

(3,660 posts)
36. Oh good one. Saying only a few care about integrity and corruption
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:44 AM
Mar 2016

but then sprinkling it with "sparklepony" word sauce makes it ok.

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
19. Gee. That could explain why there was no permanent Inspector General at State during those years.
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 10:09 AM
Mar 2016

William K. Black helped put the S&L crooks behind bars in the 1990s as a regulator and forensic economist for the SEC. He also helped Iceland put its banksters behind bars, but for some reason, the Federal government failed to call on him for help in the great Bankster Bailout of 2008. He knows a bit about Inspector Generals and Control Fraud.


The Clintons Have Not Changed: The Clintonian War on the IGs

By William K. Black
February 23, 2016 Bloomington, MN

Secretary Hillary Clinton is asking Democratic voters to believe that she has experienced a “Road to Damascus” conversion from her roots as a leader of the “New Democrats” – the Wall Street wing of the Democratic Party. When exactly this conversion occurred is never stated, but an interesting fact has emerged that demonstrates it did not occur during her service as the Secretary of State. A Wall Street Journal story provides the key facts, but none of the analysis.

Newly released emails indicate that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her top staff were involved in the selection process for the State Department’s internal watchdog, a position that ultimately went unfilled throughout her four-year tenure.


The WSJ’s angle is that such involvement in the selection of the Inspector General (IG) is a threat to the IG’s vital independence. True, and also true as the story notes that Hillary was far from rare as an agency or department head in seeking to select behind the scenes the supposedly independent IGs.

The function of the IG is to “speak truth to power.” Naturally, “power” hates IGs with a purple passion. Government leaders are most likely to hate having its abuses made public by IG when the government leader is secretly acting in concert with immensely powerful private leaders for their mutual benefit at the expense of the public.

What the WSJ missed is that the Clinton’s, for decades, have sought to destroy the independence and effectiveness of the IGs precisely because of the threat that they pose of blowing the whistle on these abuses. The Obama administration, of course, is famous for its prosecutions of those who blow the whistle on such abuses. The real story is not that Hillary attempted to select a lap dog as IG – the real story is that for her entire tenure as Secretary, four years, she left unfilled the leadership position of the only institution in the State Department dedicated to maintaining integrity and preventing the abuse of public power to aid cronies. That aid, of course, comes with the clear expectation that the cronies will make the head of the State Department wealthy as soon as she or he steps down. There is no possible defense for that, and it does not happen accidentally. The primary blame goes to President Obama, who made no nomination for the position for the entire four years. It wasn’t Republican intransigence that explains this scandal.

CONTINUED...

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2016/03/clintons-not-changed-clintonian-war-igs.html#more-10101


Bill Black is one of "those" economists who won't play ball with the money crowd. Why? He. Has. Integrity.
 

IdaBriggs

(10,559 posts)
52. Seriously, we need an FAQ in English for this stuff -
Fri Apr 1, 2016, 06:50 AM
Apr 2016

Because my head explodes, and I have only been paying attention for a few weeks!

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
54. Can't imagine why Obama let her allow that.
Fri Apr 1, 2016, 12:01 PM
Apr 2016

He knows how skeevy the Clintons are about transparency.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
32. Not just an abstract concern. US law requires foundations reveal all foreign income - it didn't >
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:15 AM
Mar 2016

Here's more from a Harper's article that makes it clear that US law was continually violated in the Foundations filings for several years:

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

One money-laundering expert and former intelligence officer based in the Middle East who had access to the foundation’s confidential banking information told me that members of royal families in Middle Eastern countries, including Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates, have donated money to the CGEP that has then been sluiced through to the Clinton Foundation. . . There are other signs that the Clintons and their foundation may have violated federal, state, and international law. Under Treasury Department money-laundering rules, the Clinton Foundation is required to disclose every financial account it holds abroad. It has failed to disclose an account linked to the CGEP on its past eight tax returns.


The Bloomberg article has been sanitized.
 

randome

(34,845 posts)
35. But...but...
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:21 AM
Mar 2016

[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)
[/center][/font][hr]
 

Trust Buster

(7,299 posts)
38. That's pathetic. The Clinton Foundatiin has earned world acclaim for it's life saving efforts
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 11:52 AM
Mar 2016

in Sub Saharan Africa and other Third World nations. Stop the political hate. You sound like a Republican.

nichomachus

(12,754 posts)
44. It spends six percent of its income on "life saving efforts"
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 02:56 PM
Mar 2016

Who knows where the rest goes? Most likely into someone's pockets.

All in it together

(275 posts)
41. Maybe things like this are the reason Hillary isn't trusted
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 01:31 PM
Mar 2016

And Clintons have investigation after investigation looking into their activities.

nichomachus

(12,754 posts)
45. No, if you don't trust Hillary, you're a sexist
Thu Mar 31, 2016, 02:58 PM
Mar 2016

Or a hater, or a right wing troll, or a "Berniebro," or stupid.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Clinton Foundation failed...