After Hillary lost 2016 presidential election, payoffs — I mean donations — to the Clinton Foundation plummeted
In one of last acts before Republicans lose control, the House will hold hearings in December 2018 on the Justice Department investigation of the Clinton Foundation.
Everybody put on your *shocked face* for what I am about to tell you.
In 2017, donations to the Clinton Foundation plummeted compared to 2016. What possibly could have been the cause?
Oh, that’s right. Hillary lost the 2016 election, so currying favor with the likely next president who didn’t actually become the next president, and her rascally husband, no longer was necessary.
The NY Post reports, Donations to Clinton Foundation plunged after Hillary’s defeat:
In the year after Hillary Clinton’s presidential defeat, donors seemed to abandon the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, with contributions plummeting nearly 58 percent.
The $36 million nosedive in donations has come to light as Republican legislators plan to hold hearings on the results of a federal corruption investigation into the non-profit next month.
Federal authorities have long been probing the non-profit over allegations of “pay to play.” Specifically, the FBI investigation focused on whether any donations made to the foundation were linked to policy decisions made while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state from 2009 to 2013, according to published reports.
The foundation has vigorously and repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.
Contributions plunged from $62,912,331 in 2016 to $26,566,825 in 2017, recently released federal tax filings show….
Executives at the non-profit said the drop in foundation revenue is due to restructuring, after the announcement in August 2016 that the Clinton Global Initiative, a foundation program that tackled some of the world’s most urgent social problems, such as health care and disaster preparedness, had shut down.
The investigation into the Clinton Foundation started no later than January 2018:
The Justice Department has launched a new inquiry into whether the Clinton Foundation engaged in any pay-to-play politics or other illegal activities while Hillary Clinton served as secretary of State, law enforcement officials and a witness tells The Hill.
FBI agents from Little Rock, Ark., where the foundation was started, have taken the lead in the investigation and have interviewed at least one witness in the last month, and law enforcement officials said additional activities are expected in the coming weeks.
The officials, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, said the probe is examining whether the Clintons promised or performed any policy favors in return for largesse to their charitable efforts or whether donors made commitments of donations in hopes of securing government outcomes.
The probe may also examine whether any tax-exempt assets were converted for personal or political use and whether the foundation complied with applicable tax laws, the officials said.
This video report on the start of the investigation is from January 2018:
More on the upcoming House hearings and the federal investigation of the Clinton Foundation via The Hill:
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) said Tuesday that House Republicans plan to hear testimony on Dec. 5 from the prosecutor appointed by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions to probe alleged wrongdoing by the Clinton Foundation.
Meadows, who is chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Government Operations, told Hill.TV’s “Rising” that it’s time to “circle back” to U.S. Attorney John Huber’s investigation with the Justice Department into whether the Clinton Foundation engaged any improper activities.
“Mr. Huber with the Department of Justice and FBI has been having an investigation — at least part of his task was to look at the Clinton Foundation and what may or may not have happened as it relates to improper activity with that charitable foundation, so we’ve set a hearing date for December the 5th,” he told Hill.TV during an interview on Wednesday.
Meadows, who is also the chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, said the committee plans to delve into a number of Republicans concerns surrounding the foundation, including whether any tax-exempt proceeds were used for personal gain and whether the foundation complied with IRS laws.
Sessions appointed Huber last year to work in tandem with the Justice Department to look into conservative claims of misconduct at the FBI and review several issues surrounding the Clintons. This includes former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s ties to a Russian nuclear agency and concerns about the Clinton Foundation.
Huber’s work has remained shrouded in mystery. The White House has released little information about Huber’s assignment other than Sessions’s address to Congress saying his appointed successor should address concerns raised by Republicans.
But Meadows said the committee thinks it’s time Huber gives an update to Congress about his findings and expects him to be one of the witnesses at the hearing.
The hearings will be the last gasp of House Republicans before they lose control of the House in January.
House Republicans can’t “Lock. Her. Up.” But they can begin to understand whether the feds are likely to do that.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
With the progress of deep state leverage and foreign intrigue, it was inevitable that the Clintons would become political incongruent (i.e. unprofitable).
A House investigation. Uh-huh. Well, they’ve stalled long enough while the R’s controlled the House, and are finally moving just about when the D’s will soon be in a good position to torpedo anything useful. For the GOPe, it sounds like another “Mission Accomplished” moment.
FBI agents from Little Rock, Ark., where the foundation was started, have taken the lead in the investigation and have interviewed at least one witness in the last month
One witness. Well, things are certainly galloping along.
The obvious crime of the Secretary Clinton era was foreign countries—Germany, UK, Norway, et al—”donating” to the Clinton money machine. What exactly did these governments think they were buying? Somebody must have thought it was something valuable—they were certainly paying enough for it. I don’t think the FBI is going to get much information on this by interviewing anyone in Little Rock.
If they’re only interviewing one witness, it should be Charles Ortel. He’s spent several years now laying out the various crimes and other malfeasance of the various Clinton foundations.
http://charlesortel.com
This is about as absurd as the subpoenas of Lynch and Comey! Nothing is going to happen and this is just a waste of time. The GOP did not want to go after hillary and the reason is that she has so much dirt on so many of them that were terrified that she might tell all. Now that the cowardly Repub House members have nothing to lose or gain they are getting brave.
Anyone for a correlation study?
Just as we are thankful for clinton for bringing down the leftist house before it destroyed our nation, clinton is thankful for Sherlock Sessions for her freedom.
If anyone still doesn’t understand how the purported conspiracy surrounding the JFK assassination could possibly be true, just lookee here.
When you have NOTHING LEFT TO SELL…….
No wonder she’s toying with the idea of running again.
Well, when one is not in play there’s no reason to pay!
Federal investigation? Yeah. Right. Gotta wonder how much the DoJ “contributed” to her “campaign(s)” The federal government could not do more to protect the Clintons, given any amount of funding.
The federal government (that is, the DOJ) had a name.
Between 2008 and 2016, it was Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch.
Between 2016 and the very recent present, it was Jeff Sessions.
Holder, Lynch and Sessions are as complicit in clinton’s corrupt as is clinton.
The past two years has proven to me that laws do not apply to Democrats.
— Especially in the mind of the majority of the Republican Party.
Well, don’t expect the swamp dwellers and corrupt Wray to do anything. They are too busy padding their nests.
Game is rigged. And the GOP shares blame for the loss of faith in the Rule of Law. Because they can’t be bothered to enforce it.
Again, I wish we could dedicate a thread to the topic – where is our red line? At what point do we stop playing by the rules? After it’s too late to matter? Or not at all?
That’s a valid answer too, I guess. If the people can’t keep the Republic then they don’t deserve it.
“The Constitution is not a suicide pact” – Justice Robet Jackson
I am with Fen. Where is our red line? I speak with people who can’t even be bothered to vote in a PRIMARY, or an off-year general election.
I understand everyone is comfortable and wants to make a living, but we will never have a better opportunity to make a difference than when Trump is in office.
Republican can’t be bothered to enforce the law, because they engage in the same practices that Democrat politicians do and benefit from it. How do you think that a Congress Critter can enter the Congress with $50,000 in the bank and can leave 12 years later with $2,000,000+? The common folk are not fighting the Dems. They are fighting the entire political class, including the GOP, are part of the Uniparty in Washington. Enforcing the rules will never be accomplished, while these people are in office, because they all benefit from ignoring them.
The wife and I had an interesting discussion about that – the problem conservatives have with the 2nd Ammendment is that we have very few proportional responses to the Long March of the Marxist Left.
There aren’t many choices between Do Nothing and Illegal Insurrection.
Which may be one reason we are so civil and disciplined re the constant poking by the Left: we have one card in our hand and it’s the Ace of Spades. And who wants to start a hot revolution over ‘x’..?
So we restrain ourselves. And the Narxists take a slice here and a slice there, and before we know it the whole loaf is gone.
We need to identify some intermediate measures short of civil war. If we are going to aggressively defend America. I don’t know what those measures would look like, but we need to figure them out soon.
Otherwise, when Trump leaves we’ll have nothing to choose from but the old Failure Theater of the Establishment GOP and a hot civil war.
Dear Fen:
I know someone who’s effective in my state with the legislature on one issue. He goes to the capitol, he finds allies there, drafts bills he wants them to adopt, and buttonholes assemblymen to vote for the bills in committee and on the floor.
Learning AND GETTING INVOLVED in the legislative process is highly valuable.
Believe it or not, writing letters to the editor can also be very useful.
What problem do you think is most important to start?
I think there are two problems.One is judges because many many things that have altered America for the worst are the result of judges overturning voters’ decisions and also imposing judges’ own desires.
On the federal level, asking our legislators to remove jurisdiction from the federal courts on many issues – or MOST issues – would help TREMENDOUSLY. Article III, Section 1, provides that Congress can determine if there are any district courts AT ALL.
The second issue is immigration. These votes are now on a knife’s edge because of it and lack of voting by our side. Keeping up the pressure on immigration is essential.
If some folks would also RUN FOR OFFICE, that would be a great good help.
There are a million things to do. I agree with you, a sticky thread on this would be a help. Isn’t there a permanent comment thread on the right side of the desktop version on the home page, where perhaps this could be a continuing topic of discussion?
Okay, it’s on this page also.
On the desktop version, in the right column, there is a GRAY BOX with the text “Readers Forum” in it.
That might be a good place for such a discussion, although broadcasting plans to the left isn’t the most intuitively smart thing to do.
Yep, you figured it out.
For decades we have had essentially a one party system in this country, at least at the federal level. It doesn’t matter who you elect, as they all end up pursuing the same goals, while raking in the same money from the same people and special interests. The Republicans have made business out of running against the evil liberal Democrats. They love to be in a minority in in Congress, or at least do not have enough votes to override a Presidential veto. That way, they do not have to enact laws which their money masters do not want, while still raking in the moolah.
In 2016, finally fed up with the one party Establishment system in DC, the people elected DJT as President. This was done to send a strong message that they were fed up with the system and that if the Republican politicians did not start listening to their constituents, they were out of a job. And, that was set to happen in the midterms. Not only were the Dems poised to take back far more seats in the House than they ended up with, but they probably could have taken the Senate, as well, as the Trump voters stayed home. Only the fact that the the Dems had a knee-jerk reaction to Kavanaugh and engaged in absolutely horrendous practices there, brought the Trump voters back out to keep the Senate. And, as people look deeper into some of these elections, which the Dems won, we will greater and greater likelihood of Dem vote fraud.
But, it is becoming clear that the political climate in Washington is not likely to change in the near future. You will either have corrupt Democrats intent upon installing a totalitarian government or corrupt Republicans who are satisfied to take the money and run. Eventually, the rank and file citizenry will decide that they have no other choice than armed insurrection. Then all bets are off, as to the survival of the nation.
Not a pretty future. But, it might be too late to stop it. We’ll have to see what happens.
The recent chief justice john roberts statement has me thinking. I believe the FISC was a uniparty creation, designed to give the deep state extra-legal powers never intended by the Constitution. The FISC operated under the (((wink wink, nod nod))) principle. The obama administration knew this coming in, and used it as leverage against roberts. “Vote for my obamacare bullsht or we’ll expose you.” How else could roberts twist himself into a legal pretzel one way for one decision, then twist himself into the exact opposite pretzel for the other bad decision. roberts had been dirtied up by bush. whether bush told obama or it was general knowledge withing the upper echelons of government, it’s now easy to see how the FISC operated so sloppily. They were a secret, wrapped in the veil of legitimacy, protected by the DOJ/FBI. Two branches of government scratching each others backs. If you look at robert’s statement towards Trump, it becomes clear he can believe it on it’s face, but not for the reason he portrays.