CS288 V2 Ortel silverscript

CS288 V2 Ortel silverscript Patricia "Trish the Dish" Negron Interviews Charles Ortel Aug 5 2017

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge5tZP1LqjI

 Transcript
0:00
we learned late last year before the
0:02
election several days before the
0:03
election there's a public resource
0:06
called the FBI bulked file which would
0:09
be just google FBI vault file you'll see
0:12
that after cases are disposed of one way
0:15
another frequently the FBI will put
0:17
public information out there on that
0:20
site and so they're two separate dumps
0:22
one around November I think first are
0:26
there about 2nd of 2016 and one several
0:30
weeks after that totally about 600 pages
0:33
and the people in your crowdsource group
0:36
who are familiar with FBI files will
0:40
have a field day going through the many
0:41
pages that are not redacted because what
0:44
these what he's confirmed is that
0:46
actually there was an FBI investigation
0:49
actually the US Attorney was serious
0:51
about it and actually by early December
0:54
2001 James Comey himself was became the
1:00
US Attorney leading the charge out of
1:02
the Southern District in this
1:03
investigation and on September 4th 2001
1:06
we a week sadly before the events Rhetta
1:10
Benson's of number 11th robert muller
1:13
what became the head of the FBI
1:15
so these notes joe numerate gives names
1:21
of many people who are involved it
1:23
doesn't give the names for the people
1:25
who were interviewed but it gives you
1:27
the for federal code statutes that they
1:30
were investigating and they
1:32
characterized that the case as US
1:35
against william j clinton and of the
1:39
four and other people and the forum code
1:43
statutes include public corruption lying
1:46
and interfering in a unity government
1:50
matter so if you have it there before
1:52
you you can see that there was major
1:55
league activity it went on until early
1:58
2005 and you know what shocks me when I
2:01
first saw this is that you know this is
2:03
prime massage evidence on the FBI
2:05
website put out to confirm that indeed
2:08
there was an investigation and that
2:10
instead of driving to an indictment to a
2:12
conviction which is
2:13
abandoned right around I noticed this
2:16
thing was open up on November 18 2004 so
2:20
muller and call me were involved
2:24
actively involved in some in inserting
2:27
Colby's case leading for time this
2:29
investigation they couldn't get the job
2:31
done query you know how hard were they
2:34
really trying right and were they going
2:37
through the paces in that one now so
2:39
that that's that's one early thing then
2:41
the second thing and what you can see
2:43
from this what it's in the public domain
2:44
and mind you the FBI the US Attorney and
2:47
others would have had a lot of
2:48
information they think to describe it as
2:51
a gold mine or you know the pressure
2:53
drove regeneration yet yeah and and they
2:57
weren't able to put two and two together
2:58
and see that this was obviously a
3:00
charity front there's exactly anytime
3:02
print exactly when call me took got
3:05
involved you could go and read Joe
3:07
connaissance book now Joe is a
3:09
left-leaning actually a very gifted
3:11
author and believe it or not in his book
3:13
man of the world which came out right
3:15
before the election last year it's a
3:17
balanced you know fairly balanced
3:19
obviously it's pro question but it's a
3:21
fairly balanced book and it talks about
3:23
the pros and the cons of what was going
3:26
on just at that time that early in 2002
3:28
it recounts that Maggie Williams the
3:31
chief of staff of the Clinton Foundation
3:33
then began to work with IRA Magaziner
3:36
on what he doesn't say in the book but I
3:38
can tell you was a completely illegal
3:41
operation to subcontract in the name of
3:45
the Clinton Foundation to IRA Magaziner
3:47
consulting company and various
3:49
volunteers an effort to in theory fight
3:51
hiv/aids around the world was never
3:53
authorized lawfully in any jurisdiction
3:55
never accounted for proper this started
3:58
in 2002 just as the FBI was investigated
4:01
just as Comey was investigating and the
4:03
investigation went on for three years
4:04
and they couldn't catch anything you
4:07
know it's just preposterous so good I'm
4:11
not done okay alright so so that's the
4:14
first leg the second piece is that
4:17
Muller stays in as head of the FBI from
4:20
September 4th 2001 to September I think
4:25
it was around the same time December 4th
4:28
2013 so all along the way
4:31
you know first here's a botched I would
4:34
argue a botched initial investigation
4:36
and then they left this Clinton
4:37
Foundation metastasize into a global
4:40
scandal and then under Obama actually in
4:44
the you know as Hillary and Bill
4:46
negotiate with incoming Obama
4:48
administration starting in November 2008
4:50
the Clinton Foundation's a disaster at
4:53
that point you can see that in the
4:54
public violence did you go to New York
4:55
state California look at the 2007 annual
4:58
report look at the correspondence file
5:00
you look at Massachusetts what happened
5:03
to their core hiv-aids operation up in
5:05
Massachusetts you could tell it was
5:07
flagrantly in violation of the law then
5:10
you check in France in public records
5:12
and you'll see that the French
5:13
government opened an investigation that
5:16
took a while to go through which
5:18
uncovers massive in proprieties now they
5:20
don't bring it home in France they don't
5:22
bring it across the finish line they
5:23
don't trigger a u.s. investigation who
5:25
knows why that may have been covered up
5:28
you know there's some question in my
5:31
mind as to who in France at that time
5:32
may have been it looked at this and said
5:35
you know this is great
5:36
we have the questions we have Obama an
5:38
embarrassing place you have leverage so
5:40
you know we don't yet really know what
5:42
happened there but all the while Muller
5:44
is on top of the FBI at this time in
5:47
addition the largest vendor the most
5:50
significant largest company that was a
5:52
vendor to this hiv/aids things company
5:54
called ran boxy there by February 14
5:58
2006 an investigation was opened that
6:02
was ultimately led by rod Rosen C
6:04
interim boxy and the question of whether
6:06
they were selling and we were buying to
6:09
the Clinton Foundation and to our
6:11
government through PEPFAR presidents of
6:13
Emergency Plan for AIDS relief whether
6:15
we were buying adulterated trust in
6:17
distributing around the world finally in
6:20
2009 and that vesting stretch that
6:22
investigation took seven years from
6:24
February of 2006 that may is 2013 and
6:27
rod Rosen seems group did not catch that
6:30
there are two more pieces the second
6:32
third and out of four pieces is that
6:35
starting in 2008-2009 timeframe Raja
6:39
Gupta so now this grace felon who at one
6:41
point ran one of the largest most
6:43
significant consulting firms in the
6:44
world Mackenzie Rashad Gupta began to be
6:47
under scrutiny presumably by our FBI by
6:50
again in the Southern District of New
6:51
York for insider trading and his ties to
6:55
the Clintons you know should have been
6:57
known by that time they were Rajat Gupta
6:59
had been involved with the connecting
7:02
Clinton Foundation up to ran boxing he's
7:04
been involved hiring Chelsea Clinton in
7:07
McKinsey he'd been involved with a
7:09
company called mind spirit LLC's the
7:11
matter of public record funneling money
7:13
to the Clintons without the complete
7:15
disclosure of the significance of that
7:17
you know tracing all the related party
7:19
connections so that investigation I
7:21
would argue didn't go as hard as it
7:23
could have gone against Rashad Gupta and
7:25
the final piece is that beginning in
7:28
January 2010 uh something called the the
7:31
clinton bush haiti fund was organized
7:34
and in the 2010 filings for the clinton
7:37
foundation the largest donation largest
7:40
single expensive largest single item was
7:43
a grant of thirty seven point two
7:45
million through the clinton bush haiti
7:46
fund from the main fund but the problem
7:49
with it is they list the grant is going
7:51
to clinton bush haiti fund in maryland
7:53
where no such fund was ever registered
7:55
and this is again right under the nose
7:58
of rod rose messina and i said there
7:59
were four pieces there's a fifth the 50s
8:02
is laureate the for-profit educational I
8:05
would argue fraud that began as a
8:08
leveraged buyout in two thousand six
8:09
seven operating from again Maryland
8:12
where rod Rosenstein was a seated US
8:15
Attorney and they didn't seem to catch
8:17
any of this so you know this thing there
8:20
are so many conflicts here in so many
8:21
areas where if you had you know the type
8:24
of team that is apparently currently
8:26
targeting Trump and has already managed
8:28
unlike in the Clinton Foundation
8:29
investigation to immediately get it
8:31
seems the grand jury impaneled makes you
8:34
have the same approach the same fair
8:36
minded approach that in theory Muller's
8:38
taking against Trump trained on this
8:40
these five strands I just told you that
8:42
you know we have to start building a
8:45
large number of additional prisons to
8:47
put away all the trustees and all the
8:50
professionals the accountants the
8:51
lawyers the consult
8:52
the donors I mean this is a gigantic
8:55
mess well and so on that note to you you
8:59
bring me to the second question which is
9:02
you know a lot of us are sort of feeling
9:06
a little bit helpless in that we see
9:09
that our law enforcement systems at the
9:13
federal and local levels are so
9:16
corrupted that you know prosecuting
9:18
something like this seems impossible but
9:21
you've identified you know an approach
9:25
to this you know through the tax side of
9:29
things that seems like it really is if
9:32
you just got you know it's the easiest
9:35
route to successfully taking the whole
9:39
thing down because of the way that the
9:41
relationships work between the donors
9:43
and the foundations so can you talk a
9:46
little bit about starting from spinning
9:48
in terms of when what where the
9:51
foundation went wrong from the start
9:52
because I think you've said that
9:55
initially they were never set up
9:57
properly and then how that impacts all
10:00
of these other foundations that have
10:02
given to the Clinton Foundation right so
10:06
when I started on this whole area of
10:08
exposing fraud I began with a very
10:12
complex entity General Electric which is
10:15
you know was at the time a nine hundred
10:17
billion dollar enterprise counting the
10:19
market value its equity in its debt film
10:21
'i'm much larger than pledge foundation
10:25
and far more complex when you're in the
10:27
any area of for-profit land investment
10:30
investing pooling corporate fraud and
10:33
investment fraud is very difficult you
10:35
have to prove what's called it's a latin
10:38
term see enter as sdie nter which
10:41
basically means knowing intent you
10:43
knowing knowingly intended to defraud
10:46
somebody then you have to prove that
10:48
that action cause actual harm and in
10:52
corporate fraud that's very difficult to
10:54
do because corporations have armies of
10:56
lawyers and they always argue that all
10:58
decisions or team decisions and they
11:00
always get legal opinions in accounting
11:02
opinions and they have something called
11:03
the business judgment rule that gives go
11:06
to directors and executives amazing
11:08
defensive Latins bucket yeah what
11:11
defenses insulation so on the other hand
11:15
why I got involved so actively in this
11:17
in the beginning one of the important
11:19
determining factors for me was when I
11:21
realized that in charity fraud there is
11:23
no such obligation all you have to do to
11:27
prove solicitation and operating fraud
11:29
is to prove that the disclosures on a
11:32
charity like these which are called
11:33
public charities they're continuously
11:35
soliciting from the public if you can
11:38
show that the disclosures that the
11:40
public have are false and material is
11:42
materially misleading that means that
11:45
they you know they can train contain
11:48
material for significant false
11:50
statements or they'll mix material
11:53
information which if you knew it might
11:56
change your behavior might might if you
11:57
knew that they were punk bilking
11:59
investors if you knew that the
12:01
executives had checkered records the
12:02
trustees and that's what hold with help
12:05
from you
12:07
and you make a donation you could
12:08
certainly argue that that you know it's
12:10
the material fact so if you have the
12:12
Cheerilee misleading disclosures and
12:13
you're soliciting not collecting
12:15
soliciting asking for money and in
12:18
particularly asking for money across
12:19
state lines using the telephone using
12:22
the internet using the mails arm these
12:25
are very serious crimes and so generally
12:30
what happens when you look at in charity
12:32
land thankfully most people operate
12:35
charities there are exceptions but most
12:37
people are honest and they get involved
12:39
in that work not because it's explicitly
12:42
not to make money but to give money away
12:44
and to help people and often to do it
12:47
anonymously or without taking you know
12:49
credit and holding that action over the
12:51
heads of the recipient so the laws are
12:54
written such that when the IRS which
12:57
would be the an IRS you know the federal
12:59
IRS or a state taxing authority smells
13:02
trouble they just simply contact the
13:06
Attorney General in the state or the UN
13:08
Department of Justice will the IRS
13:09
contact the charity says let show us
13:11
your books and you prove to us that you
13:14
are complying with the law
13:15
not the other way around you proved us
13:17
another thing that's really crucial
13:20
is that you don't get unbridled license
13:24
to operate a charity is there that the
13:25
rules are actually pretty clever you
13:27
fill out an application into form called
13:29
10:23 it's incredibly detailed you may
13:33
not lie on the form and you are granted
13:35
a I would argue a conditional license
13:38
bill mccoshen person when you read the
13:40
language the IRS explicitly stated in
13:43
January of 1998 when they granted the
13:45
conditional what's called a
13:48
determination letter based on your
13:50
submission in this document we are
13:53
granting you federal tax exemption
13:56
assuming you carry out the activities
13:59
and devote yourself for the purposes
14:01
which are laid forth in this application
14:04
and it is crystal clear in the
14:06
application that this was a domestic
14:08
charity it was not authorized to do any
14:11
international activities in this to be a
14:13
building and endowment the house the
14:17
records of the two presidencies the
14:20
house what are called presidential
14:21
records which are defined by statute in
14:23
the presidential Records Act of 1978
14:26
so it's crystal clear that's what it was
14:29
supposed to be how's those public
14:32
records which are the property weed of
14:33
people and create a research facility so
14:37
scholars can study those records that's
14:39
what this was authorized to do and
14:41
nothing more than that and back when
14:43
they applied the applications out there
14:45
the public domain is on their website it
14:47
is crystal clear they did not check the
14:51
box marked nine ten or the they do not
14:54
enter the activity code nine ten which
14:56
is for international that did not enter
14:58
activity codes to fight hiv/aids or gage
15:01
and climate change or any of these
15:03
things and these are specifically
15:05
options that are available
15:06
buta mark moreover when they registered
15:10
in the states where they did register
15:11
they never said they were going to be
15:13
international they never said they would
15:15
apply climate change they never said
15:17
they were going to do of hiv/aids work
15:19
in this early period and there's no
15:22
record that they ever amended their
15:24
Articles of Incorporation which is the
15:26
only way that you can change your
15:28
purposes now here I have to go out and
15:30
cordon distinction the Clintons are fun
15:33
of basically luring meaningful
15:37
distinctions in the law there is a major
15:40
league and I'm a lawyer but this is well
15:42
coached by many lawyers foundations our
15:46
operate and charities are authorized to
15:49
get federal tax exemption only for
15:51
specific purposes which are defined in
15:54
statute 501 C 3 and are limited you are
15:57
not allowed to go and set up it to the
15:59
the trishna grand charity to do whatever
16:01
suits your fancy tomorrow morning when
16:03
you wake up you have to say this is a
16:05
purpose and it is exclusively charitable
16:08
within the meaning of that statute 501 C
16:10
3 our return 11 Code Section 501 C 3 and
16:14
their Articles of Incorporation control
16:18
what that definition is so you have to
16:21
be precise in the Articles of
16:23
Incorporation
16:23
and nowhere in any of the US Articles of
16:27
Incorporation does it state if the
16:30
Clinton Foundation has the power to do
16:32
all these things that they have in fact
16:33
done and taking credit for which I would
16:35
argue all illegal moreover if you're
16:39
going to leave this one this is really
16:41
astonishing there are many many
16:43
agreements which you can find if you're
16:45
persisted and you have time that are
16:47
omitted from the Clinton Foundation
16:49
website a crucial one of these is what's
16:51
called a joint use and operating
16:52
agreement between the Clinton Foundation
16:55
and the National Archives believe it or
16:57
not the record that I see shows that the
16:59
president of the Clinton Foundation at
17:01
the time Williams skip Rutherford and I
17:04
are Magaziner and I believe Bill Clinton
17:06
guiltily
17:07
defrauded the National Archives
17:10
themselves and I failed to tell the
17:13
National Archives that they had engaged
17:15
in this new hiv/aids activity
17:17
internationally that they had created a
17:19
new subsidiary they do not disclose that
17:21
in the document I think they do not
17:23
disclose the application for this new
17:26
entity they do not disclose whether or
17:28
not this new entity had ever gotten
17:30
what's called a determination letter for
17:32
that activity I see no evidence that
17:34
they ever got that activity that
17:36
authorization and so between April 20th
17:39
2004 in November 18th 2004 there's quite
17:43
a public record of Clinton Foundation
17:46
executives defraud
17:47
donors and even defrauding our National
17:49
Archives because under the law the way
17:52
in which the Clinton Foundation
17:54
organized its donation to the National
17:56
Archives they granted a 19 what in
17:59
effect a 99 year license to use a
18:02
proportion of portion of this facility
18:04
in Little Rock to the National Archives
18:06
in order for that grant to be effective
18:10
the Clinton Foundation would have to be
18:11
a lawfully organized and operated
18:14
charity on the date of the grant
18:16
November 18 2004 and all the way forward
18:19
and they had broken their authority and
18:22
put themselves they are now in a
18:24
position where could we ever get a new
18:26
head of the IRS who is honest we
18:28
certainly don't have one now and a head
18:30
of the acting a head of the charities
18:32
divisions on us we also don't have one
18:34
now if we ever were to get fair minded
18:36
honest people who would follow the law
18:38
they would take a look at this record if
18:40
they're not already doing so and they
18:42
would retro actually revoke the license
18:45
of this charity as far back as I would
18:48
argue the very beginning and in so doing
18:51
they would present the trustees with a
18:53
gigantic
18:54
tax bill and they would penalties and
18:57
interest for corporate income taxes as
18:59
well as presenting significant donors
19:02
like the Gates Foundation and others
19:03
with gigantic tax bills when I say
19:06
gigantic I would see scope here at
19:09
federal level if I really want it to be
19:11
aggressive and send a message for tens
19:14
of billions of dollars in recovery ends
19:17
of billions of dollars and then in at
19:19
state level the tax rates are lower so
19:21
it's smaller amounts but it's still the
19:23
many billions of dollars and last I
19:26
checked the federal government's in
19:27
deficit most of the big states are in
19:30
deficit I think we need to collect our
19:32
tax revenue and I think a lot of these
19:34
people are very rich and have the
19:36
wherewithal to pay their fair share of
19:38
taxes was there not a an IRS audit in
19:44
Dallas occurring last year I thought I
19:47
had read that yeah so clean so what
19:51
happened is the you know there is one
19:54
Ely at least one Ely Congress person who
19:58
happens to be a woman named Marsha
19:59
Blackburn Marsha Blackburn
20:01
earng was instrumental in pushing the
20:05
FTC Federal Trade Commission to go after
20:07
something alternatively called the Texas
20:09
cancer charity group or the Tennessee a
20:13
charity group these were for charities
20:16
run by family that were just gold frauds
20:18
they raised money from a gullible public
20:21
to buy cancer medicine to distribute in
20:24
Africa does that sound familiar and and
20:27
instead they just spent in a high living
20:29
and so she pushed the FCC to quit that
20:33
group out of business and you know get
20:35
some justice which happened and she
20:37
noticed his Clinton Foundation stuff so
20:38
she sent them a letter and she fill a
20:41
letter to the last year she sent a
20:43
letter to the IRS and the FPC and one
20:47
other I forget which one demanding an
20:49
investigation the Act the same person is
20:52
still there well I would argue should be
20:53
carried out of there and frog-marched
20:55
into a grand jury there's running its
20:58
tax-exempt departments sent back eight
21:01
you know dear Jane letter you know not
21:04
even you know a letter saying you know
21:07
we'll think about it or something like
21:09
that head and anyway what Marcia
21:12
Blackburn did not take that lying down
21:13
and as a result the Dallas office you're
21:16
talking about of the IRS did have to
21:18
announce that they were opening an
21:19
investigation so what I would say when I
21:22
got into this March 16 2015 and wrote
21:25
that article for Breitbart with so many
21:27
red flags why isn't the IRS audit and
21:29
Clinton Foundation which you can read
21:30
for yourselves it's still online um you
21:35
know I I knew then that the question is
21:39
not is this a fraud the question is how
21:41
many people have cooperated to Bangkok
21:45
and obstruct the full and proper
21:48
investigation of this fraud how many
21:50
people are involved because there have
21:51
to have been an awful lot of people in
21:54
key states like California New York and
21:56
the IRS around the world among the
21:59
donors how many trustees how many
22:02
executives knew about this and decided
22:04
what what geniuses decided that we have
22:08
to cover this up because it's too
22:10
embarrassing and just let them still do
22:12
it you know where are the deliberations
22:14
surrounding the
22:15
where are the board minutes in what
22:17
states we're in cities were these boards
22:18
help who participated by telephone how
22:21
much money was sent to what bank
22:23
accounts inside and outside the US using
22:25
wires how much wire fraud is there how
22:27
much bank fraud is there how much
22:29
solicitation slaughter is there and who
22:31
is responsible for this and then the
22:33
biggest question of all is with all this
22:35
attention and there has been a lot of
22:37
attention on how many executives and
22:41
former executives and donors and others
22:43
may already be cooperating with the
22:47
authorities in an investigation now we
22:49
learned last week I learned actually
22:52
learn a few weeks earlier through a book
22:54
produced written by sharyl Attkisson
22:56
that came out on June 27 2000 17 we
22:59
learned on page 242 that the New York
23:03
Times knew by August of 2016
23:06
according to excellent sourcing that for
23:10
field offices of the FBI DC New York LA
23:14
and Little Rock were actively
23:16
investigating the Clinton Foundation by
23:18
August of 2016 and the New York Times
23:21
that stay in New York Times to decide
23:23
they have salutely had to break the law
23:25
and publish Donald Trump's tax return to
23:28
work 2005 or whatever on the front page
23:30
that same group felt they had to do that
23:33
but they weren't going to tell the
23:35
public about the existence of four
23:37
active investigations in those four
23:40
field offices and you know while I agree
23:42
with your comment about the
23:43
politicization of Justice and even of
23:46
the FBI I really do have great
23:49
confidence in this field office
23:51
professionals or the FBI I think those
23:53
people walk out their front doors every
23:55
day strapping on a help protection and
23:58
they face real dangers wherever they are
24:01
and it looks up direct in the eye and
24:03
they stare them down and they bring the
24:04
worst criminals out there they bring
24:07
these people regularly to justice 24/7
24:09
so I bet you there what if you field
24:11
office personnel who are irate over what
24:14
that we have heard that we've heard that
24:17
repeatedly that you know they're they
24:20
keep threatening to leak if something's
24:23
not done and then promises are made and
24:25
in fact I heard that
24:28
earlier this year when Comey made his
24:32
visit out with all of the field offices
24:36
the field heads that they said they were
24:39
you know this needed to be prosecuted or
24:43
they were going to leak and it was
24:44
Loretta Lynch is my understanding that
24:47
threatened them and said that they would
24:49
wind up in jail if they dared not let
24:53
this go so that we've heard that many of
24:56
them are working very hard to try and
24:58
move moving investigation forward I
25:02
think you're absolutely right about that
25:04
yeah the other thing I would say you
25:06
know I heard this you know the Clintons
25:08
and John Podesta in particular are
25:09
masterful at these ridiculous arguments
25:12
it sounds good if you have you know only
25:15
a third of your brain plugged in but
25:18
this argument that was advanced earlier
25:20
in the week well you know it would a
25:21
Podesta I think he was interviewed by
25:23
Katie Couric on Yahoo said something
25:26
like um it would great decades of
25:29
political norms if the Justice
25:31
Department prosecuted a political enemy
25:35
of the present now let's think about
25:37
that for a second that's exactly how
25:39
they get away with this charity Club you
25:41
know there's nothing nobody has ever
25:43
been prosecuted for these pressures for
25:45
that because nobody serious you know
25:48
what ever dream of doing the type of
25:50
baloney these people have done which is
25:52
rampant you're using this as a personal
25:55
slush fund to fund their political
25:56
ambitions to pay for deaf people out of
25:59
pre-tax money out of donor money instead
26:02
of paying out of their personal pockets
26:04
using you do you realize I just found
26:07
with all the work I've done I just found
26:08
there's a form that you have to fill out
26:10
in charity where if you are our
26:13
significant player in the charity and
26:14
Bill puttin in Chelsea and Hillary all
26:16
would be if you are reimbursed more than
26:19
$1,000 for expenses in a year you have
26:21
to provide full details that they have
26:23
never done that all their travel never
26:26
done that none of that goodness
26:27
Chelsea's wedding they even paid for
26:29
Chelsea's wedding which well that's the
26:32
rumor I haven't seen I haven't seen
26:34
improve that but you're right I mean
26:35
it's just you're not allowed to when you
26:37
operate a real charity and I've been
26:40
involved with some small
26:41
real ones um people question every
26:44
potential expect you know you fire up a
26:47
corporate jet and go around the world
26:48
saying and you know go on African
26:51
safaris and bringing along mistresses or
26:54
girlfriends and you know hangers on and
26:57
people you know want to maybe support
26:59
your wife is president I think you know
27:01
what to do that every penny that you
27:04
raise is supposed to go toward primarily
27:07
the authorized purpose of the charity so
27:10
if you're supposed to be a little rock
27:12
based national archives presidential
27:14
archives storing presidential records so
27:16
the scholars can research them you're
27:18
really not supposed to take a donation
27:20
and fly off to Africa and see whether
27:22
the waters clean or dirty maybe you know
27:24
what to do that well Charles one of the
27:27
other things you had said and I may I
27:31
just I'm not sure that I understood you
27:33
correctly but I think what you had said
27:34
with these other foundations like the
27:37
Gates Foundation and other vehicles that
27:40
have been used by the ultra-wealthy to
27:42
avoid taxes they are have the same
27:47
obligation when giving to say the
27:50
Clinton Foundation to determine that it
27:53
is in fact a properly operating
27:57
foundation is that not correct
27:59
oh it's absolute it's absolutely correct
28:02
so there is a distinction between what's
28:04
called a private foundation and a public
28:06
charity a private foundation is
28:09
something like was until recently
28:10
something like the Gates Foundation
28:11
that's where you know a private
28:13
nutrition aground hit the lotto or has a
28:16
big successful investment and you decide
28:18
to donate appreciated stock that you may
28:22
be a cost you fifty thousand today is
28:24
worth five hundred million
28:25
you put it in the foundation you get a
28:28
tax deduction for this appreciated value
28:31
five hundred million of stock that you
28:32
put in that only costing fifty thousand
28:34
twenty years ago and that if you're rich
28:36
and you've got other income that gives
28:38
you a gigantic tax deduction so now
28:41
you've got these appreciated shares you
28:43
sell them out of the foundation
28:44
foundation pays no tax so now it's got
28:47
five hundred million in cash right right
28:50
the in 1969 I believe is the last time
28:53
to the fund
28:55
laws were were addressed for reform and
28:59
they became concerned back in 69 tax
29:02
rates were very high so the IRS and the
29:05
Congress was concerned that people were
29:08
using private foundations as you say
29:10
slush fund and so they instituted new
29:13
tighter regulations which force the
29:15
operators of private foundations to make
29:17
sure that monies that they gave for
29:20
specific purpose were actually used for
29:23
that purpose by entities and in fact has
29:25
been organized and we've been operated
29:27
in compliance with a lot and then if you
29:29
said you were giving money to a 501 C 3
29:32
public charity it had better but well be
29:35
a 501 C 3 public charity and if the Duty
29:38
was on the donor to make sure that the
29:41
recipient had complied with the law and
29:44
if the donor had reason to suspect that
29:47
the recipient the Clinton Foundation had
29:50
not complied with the law there is an
29:52
onus on the donor who would cover to
29:55
make an attempt to recover the donation
29:57
in the year in which it was made and
29:59
failure to recover it exposes donor
30:04
foundations like the Gates Foundation to
30:06
the potential of actually being shut
30:07
down in worst case scenario use it you
30:10
know if you repeatedly did this well the
30:12
record shows that between 2001 and
30:15
around 2015 the Gates Foundation has
30:18
made over a hundred separate grants to
30:21
different Clinton Foundation operations
30:23
totaling over a hundred million dollars
30:25
on 150 million plus dollars or so um to
30:29
numerous clinton foundation entities
30:31
that are not lawfully organized and
30:33
operated and identified the clinton
30:36
foundation i mean the debate citation
30:37
last year i notified other donors last
30:39
year and they have done absolutely no so
30:42
far nothing
30:43
to try to fix the situation they're just
30:45
trying to cover it up right of course
30:48
well those guys thank you so much for
30:51
taking the time to talk to me
30:53
those were the key questions that i
30:55
think for a lot of people will help them
30:57
sort of get a better sense of you know
31:00
where this is all might be going and
31:03
sort of a little bit additional
31:05
perspective so i really appreciate your
31:07
time charles
31:09
and I hope we can reach out to you again
31:12
when the timing works but I'll be in
31:16
touch I'm sure all right Thank You
31:19
Tricia to say hi to George and Jason
31:20
will do take care what