I’m sure that you will be just as shocked as I was to discover that there are huge holes in them:
Hal Moroz, a private attorney and former Georgia judge, said he referred some of Ortel’s findings on the violations of the foundation to the state attorney general’s office.
“This is a matter of great public interest because we have a major party presidential candidate who has been greatly enriched by the questionable activities of a foundation that was meant to serve charitable public interests,” Moroz said.
You don’t say.
Jim
May 12, 2016 At 1:20 PM
The Clinton foundation’s 990s are public.
…and riddled with fraud.
It’s a huge problem. I wonder how many other “charitable” foundations — The Gates Foundation, the Buffet charity, etc, — would have at least one of the issues raised about the Clinton charity were they subject to the same level of scrutiny?
So, would it be smart of the GOP (not Trump, per se) to make auditing charity a campaign issue? Perhaps suggest academic endowment funds and mega-churches need to be at least looked at once in a while? Not just have forms published, but experts offer opinion on the data, the way public corporations have filings analyized …
It’s a much bigger issue because of the Clinton’s govt. connections. Giving favors while sec. of state rises to the level of treason.
So, would it be smart of the GOP (not Trump, per se) to make auditing charity a campaign issue?
Only to the extent that it targets the Democrat candidate. Broadly framing the issue as charities in general could backfire.
I’ve been wondering why no one seems to be talking at all about a state criminal cause of action against the Clintons. Even if DOJ fails to prosecute, a state AG might be able to. And, incidentally, presidents can’t pardon people for state offenses, only federal ones.
Why not? It’s what the environmentalists are doing.
As far as I can tell these are all federal offenses.
If there’s corruption, there’s fraud. That’s just for starters.