Financial Analyst: Clinton Foundation books loaded with 'inconsistencies,' could constitute fraud

So, remember when Guy wrote about how people were saying that the Clinton Foundation is a “slush fund?” Do you remember when the Clinton Foundation had to re-file its taxes due to glaring mistakes, like claiming they had received zero donations from foreign and U.S. governments since 2010 when they indeed received tens of millions of dollars? Well, a Wall Street analyst that helped General Electric with their financial pickle in 2008 alleges that the Foundation’s books are fraught with so many errors that it could constitute fraud. Sarah Westwood of the Washington Examiner has the story:


After more than a year of research, a Wall Street analyst is arguing the Clinton Foundation’s books are riddled with financial inconsistencies that rise to the level of “fraud.”

Charles Ortel, who gained recognition for correctly identifying problems with General Electric’s financial statements in 2008, has prepared 40 reports highlighting discrepancies that he said proves the Clinton Foundation has covered up cash flow since 1997.

The financial whistleblower said his 15 months of research revealed gaps in the amount of money donors claim to have given and the amount of money the foundation claims to have received.


The pattern extends to smaller charities linked to the Clintons, Ortel noted. One organization founded by former President Bill Clinton, the American India Foundation, has problems that stretch around the country.

For example, the American India Foundation’s nonprofit status was revoked in Illinois in 2002, according to state records. This year, the charity was listed as “not in good standing.”

In Massachusetts, the foundation had its nonprofit status revoked in June 2014 and was not reinstated until March 22 of this year.

In March 2015, the charity held a gala in an Atlanta hotel, according to an event promotion.

But the American India Foundation was not then registered to solicit funds in the state of Georgia, correspondences shared with the Washington Examiner suggest. In fact, the only charity in the Clinton orbit that was registered in the Peach State as of October was the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation — even though the Clinton Global Initiative plans to hold its glitzy annual conference in Atlanta next month.


A spokesman for the foundation said the lapse in registration in Massachusetts was due to documents the state said it never received and that the registration lapse in Illinois was due to a misunderstanding involving the deadline to file paperwork. The spokesman also said the foundation registered to solicit donations in the state of Georgia in March of this year.

The little-known charity is just one example of the way the Clintons’ philanthropic network skirts federal and state regulations to continue operations despite massive financial discrepancies, Ortel said.

In other cases, the lines between foundation entities like the Clinton Health Access Initiative, the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative, and the Clinton Climate Initiative were blurred enough to conceal specific transactions, he explained.


There are two issues here with Clinton’s public relations nightmares concerning the Foundation and her email server. With her private email system, we know that it wasn’t “absolutely permitted,” though she says it was in various interviews. We know that it was an unusual setup that was highly discouraged by U.S. officials—and that even if it was permitted for Clinton to send communications on systems outside of a government agency’s email system—it has to be preserved for the public record per a 2009 regulation from the National Archives and Records Administration. Clinton did not follow these regulations—and she lied when she said there was no classified information on her server.

With the Foundation, we have shoddy tax returns, over 1,000 foreign donors that weren’t disclosed, the largest individual donor to the Clinton Foundation has conducted business in Iran that could be in violation of U.S. sanctions—and Clinton Foundation donors lobbied the State Department when Hillary was our top diplomat. The Clinton Health Access Initiative never handed over foreign donor information, which was promised to assuage concerns about these types of donations.

We have serious ethical issues here, especially when Clinton has been known to do 180-degree turns on policy when dollars begin to flow into the Foundation. Just look at what happened with the Colombia Free Trade Agreement. More disconcertingly, look at the increase in arms sales to nations that gave millions to the Foundation. You cannot deny that there is a pattern here, one that should have everyone–Democratic and Republican–pondering the ethical ramifications of the power couple’s other ventures. We have a woman who could be the next president of the United States, whose family runs one of the largest, most influential non-profits that runs like a bank to cash in favors from wealthy donors––both foreign and domestic.


Even MSNBC’s Chris Matthews had a moment of clarity when he said that it’s clear that when you give money to the Clintons, you want something in return. That could come in the form of trade agreements, arms deals, or a screening station in Abu Dhabi that would allow passengers to be cleared prior to entry into the United States. Oh, and this was after the nation paid your husband $1 million for two speeches on tourism and climate change; trips that were arranged by you, Mrs. Clinton and your then-State Department staff. Another layer of the onion rests with the alleged $2 million doled out by the Foundation’s network to a for-profit company run by friends of the Clintons. Under federal law, non-profit, tax-exempt organizations aren’t supposed to act upon private interests, though we all know the Clintons play by their own rules. That’s the problem.

Editor’s Note: This was cross-posted from

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on HotAir Videos

David Strom 12:40 PM | July 24, 2024