Breaking! FBI Goes After Hillary: Probes Oz Govt’s $88 Million ‘Donation’ To The Clinton Foundation!


FBI Goes After Hillary: Probes Oz Govt’s $88 Million ‘Donation’ To The Clinton Foundation!

With the FBI launching a formal investigation into the Clinton Foundation to determine whether they had accepted donations in return for political favors, particularly during her presidential run, it would seem that their search for evidence is taking them to lands far away… way down under, in fact.

They have apparently asked Australian former radio-DJ-turned-investigative journalist/ not really a journalist, Michael Smith, for evidence regarding his claims of malfeasance – claims that implicate William J. (Bill) and Hillary Clinton and former Australian prime ministers Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard.

It just so happens that the Australian government, after spending some $88 million on the foundation in the years preceding her run, completely stopped sending money in November 2016 – right after Hillary’s loss of the elections.

More than circumstantial evidence of foul play though, Michael Smith claims that he is sending the FBI a number of reportsby way of criminal complaint” outlining the malfeasance.

If you’re easily bored, the TLDR version can be found in the paragraphs at the bottom.

In his first report to the FBI director, Smith notes that there are three points of contention regarding Australia’s donations to the Clinton foundation, particularly in relation to a $25 million portion that went to the “Clinton HIV Aids Initiative” (CHAI):

1. William J Clinton’s false and misleading claims regarding his relationship with the Clinton Foundation

2. The backdating of the purported merger agreement between the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative Inc and associated crimes

3. The illegal conduct of the Clinton Foundation and its associates in Papua New Guinea, including the apparent corruption of public officials

FBI goes after Clinton

Point 1

He notes that on 22 February 2006, the Australian government’s department of foreign affairs (DFAT) stated that a “Memorandum of Understanding” (MOU) had been reached with Bill Clinton regarding its support “for the William J Clinton Foundation HIV/Aids Initiative” – it seems Bill had made some erroneous claims.

William J Clinton signed the document over the words “For the William J Clinton Foundation HIV/Aids Initiative”.

“In a statement (emailed to me) DFAT advised that Clinton executed the agreement as the “Founder” of the Clinton Foundation.

“Clinton was never the “founder” of the Clinton Foundation which was incorporated in 1997, nor of the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative Inc. For at least 5 years from 2001, Clinton was prohibited from holding a number of legal and/or trustee positions on account of his disbarment following dishonesty convictions in US courts…

“…Clinton’s false representations in soliciting donations represent serious criminality…

“As a result of the representations made in the MOU, the Australian government subsequently established contractual/financial agreements with the Clinton Foundation HIV/Aids Initiative in respect of PNG, Vietnam, China and Indonesia and donations totaling more than $25M were transmitted to the Clinton Foundation or other entities associated with it.

In claiming and to have control over the foundation and signing a contract that required him to have control when legally he did not, he allegedly fooled the Australian government by making assurances that he could not, legally at least, keep.

Point 2

It seems CHAI itself did not technically exist; indeed, when the IRS refused to grant CHAI tax-exempt status, the Clintons decided to merge that sector back into the Clinton Foundation which was tax exempt. Unfortunately, they did not tell anybody (including the Australian government) of that technicality.

“While Clinton’s false representations in soliciting donations represent serious criminality, my investigations in this matter have disclosed other serious crimes involving Clinton and the Foundation.

“The conduct includes back-dating documents, forgeries and false and misleading statements made to the IRS in connection with a purported 31 December 2005 merger between the Clinton Foundation and a separate legal entity, the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative Inc.

“During 2004, the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative Inc brought in revenues of $5.8M. It had staff salaries of $800K along with a massive travel bill of $2.3M.

“In December 2005, the CHAI was apparently advised by the IRS that its application for exemption from taxation had been refused. The refusal was a surprise and a most unwelcome one. Once final, it meant CHAI’s authority to operate would have been removed.

“On 22 February 2006, Clinton signed the MoU with the Australian government for and on behalf of the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative.

“On 6 November 2006 – Clinton Foundation 2005 IRS 990 date stamped filed with the IRS at Ogden…. Those documents describe a merger of the CHAI and the Clinton Foundation effective at 31 December 2005, with the CHAI having ceased to exist on that date and only the Clinton Foundation continuing as the surviving entity.

“During 2006-2007 – the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative Inc continues to operate with its IRS recognized Federal Employer Identification Number 20-0921629 – quite separate from the Clinton Foundation 31-1580204.

“CHAI continued to feature on the Clinton Foundation marketing material as a separate “initiative” or division. The entity continued to operate wholly separately with its own premises at Water Street, Quincy MA.

The Clinton Foundation itself was not authorized by the IRS to conduct any business in the distribution of HIV/Aids treatments. The apparent refusal of the IRS to grant the CHAI tax-exempt status was the trigger for a chain of events over several months which created substantial problems for the two entities. Apparently, persons associated with Clinton and Magaziner decided the solution was to pretend that the CHAI Inc had been dissolved and merged into the Clinton Foundation on 31 December 2005. That deception left Australia exposed to contracts with a ghost corporation.”


Point 3

As part of the deal, the Clinton Foundation would allegedly match the $25 million poured into CHAI, $15 million of which was directed to Papua New Guinea. Auditors of the PNG project found that the amount fronted by the Clintons was much less than promised.

We put in $15M odd cash, but according to the audit report:

“CF has contributed pediatric ARVs, pediatric OI drugs, commodities for the Early Infant Diagnosis Program (e.g. reagents, equipment including PCR machine) totaling US$417,622 USD as of June 2009“.

Further, the auditors noted that:

  • assessment of value for money has not been possible due to insufficient financial
  • information on project reporting
  • the inadequacy of project documentation has quite significantly affected the ability to
  • undertake a systematic evaluation of the project.
  • inadequate outcome indicators against one consistent set of objectives limit the extent
  • to which there can be an acceptable discussion about effectiveness.
  • no statement of project goal or purpose,
  • no clear Program Area objectives, and
  • no targets

The auditors basically found that the Clintons had not matched the $15 million donated by the Australian government, that CHAI had not provided them with the documentation and financial information required to confirm where the money that had been donated had been spent and finally that the organization had no goals or targets regarding HIV treatment.

In short, Bill signed an AIDS agreement with the Australian government that was null and void, for money that would be paid into an entity that did not exist. Money that was promised to match that which was given by the Australian government was not given in full and money that was given could not be accounted for because auditors were not provided with documentation. Also, the entity had no real goals regarding how the money would be spent nor targets to be met. This is according to a journalist who does not enjoy being called a journalist, Michael Smith, who apparently has documentary evidence.

Smith ends off by pointing out that he has the documents substantiating these points and would provide it to the FBI director if requested to do so.

Original Post: