Clinton Corruption Thread

domelogic

Registered User
Did Mueller, Comey & Rosenstein Cover Up $37 Million in Missing Clinton Foundation Cash Raised for Haiti Earthquake Relief?


Here’s a question for which Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, special counsel Robert Mueller, and former FBI Director James Comey may well know the answer to — but aren’t likely to want to talk about in public, under oath:

Why did the Clinton Foundation send a $37 million grant for the Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund in 2010 to a Baltimore post office box when the CBHF told federal tax authorities that its only office that year was in Washington, D.C.?

Be prepared, because the answers also make clear that too many powerful people were and are covering up an odious set of scandals that implicate Establishment Republicans and Democrats alike.

Origins of the Clinton Foundation frauds. From Oct. 23, 1997, until Jan. 20, 2001, President Bill Clinton had the power to ensure that no prosecutions might move forward in the Department of Justice (DOJ) against the William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation, an entity that still has never bothered to file a mandatory federal income tax return for Oct. 23, 1997, through Dec. 31, 1997.

Though there is abundant evidence in the public domain of defective filings made under oath, across state lines, using the mails, Clinton likely felt secure that government officials, even in states controlled by Republicans, would never bring solicitation fraud prosecutions against his nascent “charity.”

Then, as it became clear that former Republican Texas Gov. George W. Bush would be inaugurated as his successor in the Oval Office, Clinton and others took steps to ensure that allies would occupy key roles inside the IRS, DOJ and elsewhere in the federal Establishment.


Enter Rosenstein, Mueller and Comey. According to his official biography, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein “from 2001 to 2005 … served as Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Tax Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. He supervised the division’s criminal sections and coordinated the tax enforcement activities of the Tax Division, the U.S. attorney’s offices and the Internal Revenue Service.”

Records available through the FBI vault confirm that the FBI and DOJ attorneys conducted investigations, empaneled grand juries, and issued subpoenas, yet they were unable to bring indictments or gain convictions against the many individuals and entities linked to the Clinton charity, which clearly engaged in a raft of frauds, across state lines, and in numerous nations.


These FBI records, many of which are heavily redacted even now, clearly show that former FBI Director James Comey played “leadership” roles in these epic failures and that Comey’s predecessor as FBI chief, Robert Mueller, was personally aware of the course of these ineffective efforts after he assumed his duties in September 2001.


To see how badly Rosenstein, Mueller and Comey flubbed the Clinton Foundation “investigation,” visit the organization’s website and try to find audits for 1998 through 2004. You will not find them there, but you will find noncompliant accounting work product for 2000 through 2004 here, here, here, and here.

You will never notice charity fraud when you refuse to look at key evidence including fake audits that ineffectively mask the brazen theft of at least $64 million.

Recent years that matter: 2009 forward. The Clinton Foundation filed an amended federal tax return for 2010 on Nov. 16, 2015. The largest single expense declared for 2010 is a grant of more than $37 million to the CBHF at a post office box in Baltimore, Maryland.

This recent — within the statute of limitations — declaration on page 36 of the amended return is boldly incorrect. Sworn declarations made using the U.S. mails across state lines to New York and Minnesota declared that the only office and mailing address that CBHF had during the year in question was in Washington, D.C.

So why was the $37 million sent to a Baltimore post office address? Who retrieved the check from the P.O. box? What happened to the $37 million thereafter?

Moreover, it is mathematically impossible to reconcile declarations made in these key states to regulators that are public records with federal tax filings for CBHF. Here’s why: In total, CBHF declared nearly $49 million in grants and contributions for the entire year 2010.

This means that if the Clinton Foundation actually sent more than $37 million to a Baltimore address, it must have done so after May 31, 2010, which would mean that CBHF collected more than $71 million during a year when it ultimately declared just under $49 million in total revenues.

Claims by the Clinton Foundation concerning its supposed grant to CBHF do not and cannot be squared with CBHF filings. Someone here is lying and many people are doing their best to cover up what looks like a crystal-clear instance of charity fraud and other serious crimes.

How much money did the Clinton Foundation actually receive during 2010, while soliciting to help poor Haitians after their devastating earthquake? More important, where did the money raised for Haiti by Clinton, Bush, and their associates actually go? And remember, 2010 was a key election year, with much at stake for Democrats.

We certainly will never know the answer to that question if we must rely on Rosenstein, Mueller and Comey, who, it must be remembered, were failing to catch obvious frauds during those early years.

And one more thing: The same accounting firm — BKD LLP — that rendered opinions to the Clinton Foundation during its early years continued as its auditor during and after 2010.

President Donald Trump has been too patient with too many powerful swamp creatures. Americans deserve a real, empowered investigation into Clinton charity and allied frauds, and it should be convened as soon as possible.
 
And the Clinton cash machine says fuck those Haitian motherfuckers.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

THE FEZ MAN

as a matter of fact i dont have 5$
Why do they waste my money on this shit, they could have an Everest size mountain of evidence against the Clinton brothers and NOTHING will ever happen, ever. And even if something did come of it, it would be denied by the democrats, the facing cunt could be set to jail (which will never happen) and she would still be considered the winner of the election and the savior of the free world by her followers
 

domelogic

Registered User
I still can’t believe someone actually married ol Thomas the Tank Engine Face.

She is not that bad for what you get in return. The family wealth may just be worth it and if she is like mom you can have side pieces. Hell you can even break the law continuously without worry. Not a bad deal for some. Then again you do have to put up with the family and her. Now that I think about what on paper seemed like an easy decision is not so easy
 

Fred West

Registered User
She is not that bad for what you get in return. The family wealth may just be worth it and if she is like mom you can have side pieces. Hell you can even break the law continuously without worry. Not a bad deal for some. Then again you do have to put up with the family and her. Now that I think about what on paper seemed like an easy decision is not so easy
Her voice is as bad as her mother's. That'd probably seal it for me.
 

the Streif

¡¡¡¡sıʞunɹɹɹɹɹɹɹℲ
Donator
She is not that bad for what you get in return. The family wealth may just be worth it and if she is like mom you can have side pieces. Hell you can even break the law continuously without worry. Not a bad deal for some. Then again you do have to put up with the family and her. Now that I think about what on paper seemed like an easy decision is not so easy
No.
 
Comey's book reveals that the New York Times was correct about Clinton's FBI woes

Turns Out That New York Times’ Clinton Email ‘Botched Story’ Actually Wasn’t

In July 2015 the New York Times published the scoop of a lifetime when top Department of Justice sources told reporters that inspectors general at two separate agencies had asked the DOJ to open an investigation into Hillary Clinton's email use after discovering the then-secretary of state had sent emails containing classified information.

But within the next 48 hours, the Times made two major corrections. First it changed the story to indicate that the referral was for an investigation into Hillary Clinton's private email and not necessarily Clinton herself. Then its Department of Justice sources suddenly reversed themselvesnand said that the referral was not "criminal" in nature, but a "security review."
But former FBI director James Comey's new book indicates that the ridiculous semantics game was even more moot than it appeared. The Times actually understated the reality: Clinton was already under criminal investigation at the time by the FBI, and yes, she was definitely the target.

"Though The Times may have thought those clarifications were necessary, their original story was much closer to the mark," Comey writes. "It was true that the transmission to the F.B.I. from the inspector general did not use the word ‘criminal,’ but by the time of the news story, we had a full criminal investigation open, focused on the secretary’s conduct."

This isn't an entirely new revelation, although Comey does provide the highest-ranking acknowledgement to date. The Times reported last year that "despite what officials said in public," the DOJ "knew a criminal investigation was underway, but officials said they were being technically accurate about the nature of the referral." It also reported that "some at the F.B.I. suspected that Democratic appointees were playing semantic games to help Mrs. Clinton, who immediately seized on the statement to play down the issue."

 

JoeyDVDZ

Well-Known Member
Donator
Juan sucks but Jesse Watters banter and condescension with him is annoying. Also I'm fairly certain Greg Guttfeld hates Juan's guts.
Proof of this statement just happened on the Five. Juan was trying to stick to the "facts are unfolding" narrative about the lynch king, and accused Greg of laughing about hate crimes. He returned with "No, I'm laughing because there's not as much racism in America as you want there to be". Smashed that smug shithead right in the teeth.
 
Proof of this statement just happened on the Five. Juan was trying to stick to the "facts are unfolding" narrative about the lynch king, and accused Greg of laughing about hate crimes. He returned with "No, I'm laughing because there's not as much racism in America as you want there to be". Smashed that smug shithead right in the teeth.
Yeah, I think Greg hates Juan. Though not as much as he hates Brian Kilmeade. When Kilmeade is on the Five with Gutfield, it's a riot.
 

JoeyDVDZ

Well-Known Member
Donator
Yeah, I think Greg hates Juan. Though not as much as he hates Brian Kilmeade. When Kilmeade is on the Five with Gutfield, it's a riot.
I love how Greg just talked right over Juan trying to defend his retarded stance, wouldn't even give the moron time to babble out his bullshit take on Smollett. Yeah, Greg really doesn't like Williams. You're right though, he really hates Kilmeade. Can't say I blame him; Kilmeade is a boring putz.
 

ruckstande

Posts mostly from the shitter.
I can't believe I actually miss the other Democrat that got fired. He at least has points. Juan sees nothing but racists.
 

JoeyDVDZ

Well-Known Member
Donator
I can't believe I actually miss the other Democrat that got fired. He at least has points. Juan sees nothing but racists.
Never really watched The Five when Bob Beckel was on it, but I heard it a couple of times in the car. He seemed to be a better fit to the show than Williams.
 
Top