Wall Street expert: Clinton Foundation a ‘vast criminal conspiracy’

Emails show Hillary’s deep ties as secretary of state

From: wnd.com,  by Jerome R. Corsi,  on Sep 10, 2015,  see the article HERE.

NEW YORK, NY - DECEMBER 15: Former U.S. Secretary of State and first lady Hillary Clinton speaks at a press conference announcing a new initiative between the Clinton Foundation, United Nations Foundation and Bloomberg Philanthropies, titled Data 2x on December 15, 2014 in New York City. Data 2x aims to use data-driven analysis to close gender gaps throughout the world. (Photo by Andrew Burton/Getty Images)

NEW YORK – Adding to Hillary Clinton’s concern that the FBI may open a criminal investigation into her use of a private email server is evidence among the emails recently released by the State Department that she maintained deep ties to the Clinton Foundation while serving as U.S. secretary of state.

In a new report, Wall Street analyst and investor Charles Ortel charges the Clintons and their associates have been engaged in a “vast criminal conspiracy to defraud the general public, enrich themselves and entrench their political influence.”

Ortel believes the evidence calls for a criminal investigation by the FBI as well as by attorneys general in four states where the Clinton Foundation is registered, maintains offices and/or has aggressively solicited individual donations: Arkansas, Massachusetts, California and New York.

He published on his website a new executive summary of his “First Foundation Report” of his continuing investigation into the operations of the Bill, Hillary, & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

“Since July 2002, the worst known example of flagrant and unpunished abuses by a U.S. domiciled, public charity is the record of voluminous flawed, inaccurate, false and misleading public disclosures made by representatives of the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation (the “Clinton Foundation”), as trustees, executives and agents illegally solicited across state, and national boundaries and raised close to $2 billion from donors who were either willingly or unwillingly duped,” Ortel alleges.

Ortel has shared with WND his investigative files amounting to hundreds of pages of tables, exhibits and appendices. The documentation supports his claim that between 2002 and 2013, the Clinton Foundation solicited potential donors across state and national boundaries to raise close to $2 billion.

“The biggest unanswered questions concern why state, federal, and foreign government authorities have failed, so far, to prosecute trustees, executives, and agents of the Clinton Foundation and its constituent elements for ceaselessly promoting a global criminal enterprise in the guise of philanthropy,” Ortel writes.

“Known and unprosecuted felony and misdemeanor offenses of Clinton Foundation Trustees and others include taking donations under false pretenses, diverting donations from their intended purposes, failing to exercise required control over operations, creating substantial private gain, allowing insiders to appropriate illegally created private gains, and thereby corroding an otherwise well deserved reputation that many American charities rightfully have obtained over decades, for performing good works worldwide in conformity with applicable laws and regulations.”

Clintons admit to filing false financials

In his report, Ortel stresses the Clintons admitted to violating federal and state law by acknowledging in April that the foundation needed to withdraw error-ridden IRS Form 990s “for some years” and file corrected financials.

He cites an April 26 statement by Clinton Foundation acting CEO Maura Pally titled “A Commitment to Honesty Transparency, and Accountability.” Published on the Clinton Foundation website, it says that after a “voluntary external review is completed,” the foundation “will likely refile forms for some years.”

Pally tried to excuse the erroneous financial statements filed with the IRS by claiming that “mistakes” in incorrectly combining government grants with other donations were not uncommon for “organizations of our size.” She added that the foundation was “acting quickly to remedy” the problem and “to take steps” to make sure no more erroneous financials are filed with the IRS in the future.

For Ortel, that explanation does not excuse the various requirements under state and federal law specifying that charitable organizations must file truthful, complete and accurate financial statements with regulators, including the IRS, verified by competent, informed and independent auditing firms.

Ortel points out that since April 26, the Clintons have not filed or posted on their website corrected financial statements along with “thorough and granular explanations” of any and all amendments made to the erroneous financial statements.

Ortel puts the blame on federal and state regulators, including the IRS, for failing to hold the Clinton Foundation to standards regarding the operation of charitable organizations. In contrast, “smaller public charities, run by less august persons who are, less well trained professionally, and by less responsible principals who solicited fewer target donors and raised smaller sums of money have been aggressively prosecuted, and severely punished via criminal and civil legal proceedings.”

Meanwhile, Ortel alleges that despite the continued failure to post the promised corrected financial statements, “the Clinton Foundation and constituent elements recklessly continue to solicit donations on the basis of inaccurate, false, and misleading public filings in violation of state, federal, and foreign laws.”

‘Hillary culpable’

Ortel charges that because Hillary Clinton served as a trustee of the Clinton Foundation, she cannot escape legal responsibility for the erroneous statements the Clinton Foundation now admits having filed with the IRS. He contends she also is responsible for inconsistent, incomplete, materially misleading and outright false financial filings that invalidate audited financial statements since the foundation’s inception.

Ortel alleges that while Clinton served as trustee, from 2013 through April 2015, the Clinton Foundation “procured independent audits of financial statements and submitted public filings to government authorities that were false, materially misleading, and fraudulent, while actively soliciting donations across state and national boundaries.”

He charges that during Hillary’s tenure as trustee, the Clinton Foundation filed false and misleading financial forms concerning calendar years 2010 and 2011. Also, the Clinton Health Access Initiative, CHAI, aimed at combating HIV/AIDS in third world countries, filed amended financial forms for 2012 and 2013. Ortel takes that as an admission CHAI initially filed erroneous financial forms in apparent violation of state and federal law.

Ortel notes that while she was a trustee, Clinton never demanded any reexamination of Clinton Foundation financial filings for the years 2002 through 2013. He has concluded the audited statements for the Clinton Foundation for those years were inconsistently consolidated “in gross violation of relevant accounting standards and of applicable state, federal and foreign laws that require production of wholly accurate, truthful, and complete informational returns.”

“Legally mandated Clinton Foundation disclosures that are the responsibility of Clinton Foundation Trustees and must be wholly accurate, complete and, in the case of financial disclosures, verified by competent, informed, and independent accounting professionals,” Ortel writes.

“Instead, Clinton Foundation public disclosures concerning the period July 2002 to present are false, incomplete, inaccurate, and not appropriately verified by independent auditors.”


If you subscribe to the “Hillary Clinton is always out for herself” meme (as I do), you have to conclude that her reason for the secret personal email server was to hide her activity from various watchdog groups – like congressional investigations and FOIA requests. I don’t believe that she was concerned about her diplomatic activities being questioned (none of us could have foreseen Benghazi), no, that would be an unlikely reason for her to covet a secure method of correspondence. Additionally, Obama would have backed her diplomatic activities since they would have been done under his auspices. No, she didn’t need a completely secure method of communication solely for diplomatic work – she already had that available under the State Department system.

I believe that her Secretary of State position gave she and Bill the opportunity to “go into business” selling her (and Bill’s) influence as well as “influence futures” that would mature and be much more valuable when she became president.

I believe that the whole reason for the secret server was to protect her correspondence relating to Bill’s speaking gigs and related “contributions” to the Clinton Foundation. The Clinton Foundation is essentially the family’s business, much like a mom and pop bakery or ice cream shop – but on a massive scale and dealing with millions of dollars. The problem was that the negotiations and arrangements with the entities desiring influence had to be kept secret. Public knowledge of the quid pro quo contributions for influence arrangements would be extremely damaging to Hillary’s desire to be the country’s first female president – and she couldn’t allow that. So, she set out to hide the Foundation-related activities from any outside sources and I’ve no doubt that among those deleted emails were hundreds (maybe thousands) of smoking gun pieces of evidence, all related to the Clinton Foundation “sales” and revenue.

That’s what I think.




Tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Wall Street expert: Clinton Foundation a ‘vast criminal conspiracy’

  1. Hardnox says:

    Good post. I agree 100% with your commentary. The Clintons have been able to change the definition of corruption.

    Still wondering what these two have on the other politicians, otherwise they’d be behind bars.

    • Garnet92 says:

      I wish I knew .. they must be the most protected individuals in the country. So far, it looks like they’ve gotten away with everything (even murder?), but maybe, with a little luck, they’ve met their Waterloo! One can hope, eh?

  2. Uriel says:

    Me as well. There have been a lot of unexplained deaths and prison time for people who have tried to blow the whistle on these two. No doubt “daddy bucks” or someone else had a lot to do with this. These two have gotten away with way too many things over the years. Looks like DOJ and AG are covering her back as best they can if current articles are to be believed. The ONLY way Clintons will answer on earth will be if they are totally discredited and caught redheaded on tape in front of a live feed. I think God can adequately handle after they depart.

    • Garnet92 says:

      As I said to Hardnox, Hill and Billary must be the two most protected criminals in history – why? I don’t know, but they’ve used every trick in the book to intimidate witnesses and people who know things. People are scared of what might happen if they spill the beans, like they could get DEAD (or worse).

  3. Kathy says:

    That would make sense, Garnet, because that’s the area that could do the most damage if everything were to come out.

    I’m starting to lose track of some details but do we know if she used the State Dept system at all? Didn’t she say it was too much trouble to keep up with two devices? If that’s the case, then everything in her world was on that server.

    • Uriel says:

      Last I heard she was never issued a State Blackberry. My guess she said Not.

    • Garnet92 says:

      I read, as late as this morning, that Hillary didn’t use any State-issued devices – that would have to include her Blackberry. As far as I know, EVERYTHING she did from a correspondence standpoint went through that secret personal server.

      • Uriel says:

        Today’s slime grabbag has DOJ defending her actions saying it WAS NOT illegal for her to have a personal server (cough, gag, cough. Wink wink). Someone must have forgotten to read the LAW and the exit check list. I read it and there were at least 5 laws to break (criminal action threatened for noncompliance) but hey she is above the law. She did not sign or at least exit paper has not been found.

  4. vonmesser says:

    She’s a crook. So, what else is new? (note massive sarcasim in voice)