Exposing Hillary So She Won't Get Elected

Remember This: In 2007 Interview, Clinton Foundation Official Claims It’s Not a Charity

One of the biggest excuses or rationales Bill and Hillary Clinton have been trying to push on the public regarding their family foundation is that it is supposedly a global charity. They point to all of the wonderful and amazing work the organization has done. Never mind the fat we have already shown how a paltry 9.9 percent of their revenue has been distributed as charitable grants and other freely given financial and charitable help.

Now, we have a really good report from The Federalist showing how this foundation is really not a charity at all. More:

“The tax-exempt non-profit has also been criticized for spending a huge chunk of its money on office supplies and travel instead of charitable grants. An analysis by The Federalist showed that the Clinton Foundation spent less than 10 percent on charitable grants from 2011 through 2013. One argument offered by Clinton defenders is that the former first family’s charitable organization isn’t a grant-making foundation and instead chooses to do much of its charitable work in-house.

The result, according to these defenders, is that the group’s charitable work won’t really show up on a tax form since the bulk of it is done by salaried employees of the foundation. There’s only one problem with this rationale: it was resoundingly rejected by Ira Magaziner, the CEO of the Clinton Health Access Initiative and the brains behind the Clinton Foundation. ‘This is not charity,’ Magaziner told the Atlantic in 2007. ‘The whole thing is bankable. It’s a commercial proposition.’”

Amazing. Plus, we have also already seen how some are starting to liken this Foundation to a typical slush fund. The Clintons have established little more than a shadowy bank account into which governments and businesses can essentially buy favors from the Clintons, the State Department, and even the federal government.

Former President Bill Clinton himself has also accepted large speaking fees from groups and businesses that were lobbying the State Department while Hillary was the Secretary. Is it any real surprise these businesses almost always had the government rule or act in their favor or best financial interests?

All of this might be able to be forgiven or at least looked upon less unfavorably if not for another interesting fact: The Clintons even broke an agreement they made with the Obama White House to publicly identify all of their donors.

The rationale behind not identifying these donors, they claim, was due to rules by the Canadian government about the identification of donors. Except this is not true…there is no blanket federal ban in Canada regarding public disclosures of donors to non-profits. But, then again, their foundation really isn’t a true non-profit. Remember, it’s all bankable!

This is simply what rich liberals do. They lie and cheat in order to get rich off the back of the public. Hillary Clinton feels she is entitled to all of this. She thinks she deserves to be Queen. Is this really the type of person we want as our next President?

What do YOU think about all this?