Patterico's Pontifications


Potential Charity Fraud Exposes the Stark Choice Facing Voters in November

Filed under: General,Stark Choice — Patterico @ 9:17 pm

Americans face a clear choice this November, between a candidate who may have committed charity fraud, and . . . another candidate who may have also committed charity fraud.

Via redc1c4 comes a link to a shocking report that suggests — hold on to your hats, folks, because this one is going to floor you — that something might not be quite on the up and up with the Clinton Foundation:

The Wall Street analyst who uncovered financial discrepancies at General Electric before its stock crashed in 2008 claims the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation has a number of irregularities in its tax records and could be violating state laws.

Charles Ortel, a longtime financial adviser, said he has spent the past 15 months digging into the Clinton Foundation’s public records, federal and state-level tax filings, and donor disclosures. That includes records from the foundation’s many offshoots—including the Clinton Health Access Initiative and the Clinton Global Initiative—as well as its foreign subsidiaries.

According to Ortel’s reports, the contribution disclosures from the Clinton Foundation don’t match up with individual donors’ records. He also argued that the foundation is not in compliance with some state laws regarding fundraising registration, disclosure requirements, and auditing rules.

The linked article is worth reading in full. This guy is no joke, and his concerns sound like they have a solid basis.

Meanwhile, Trump still can’t account for about half of the money he supposedly raised for veterans — you remember, his little stunt where he was avoiding tough questions from Megyn Kelly in a debate?

So, voters, you’re going to have to choose. Do you really want to let the presidency go the candidate who might be engaged in charity fraud? Or will you instead cast your vote for the other candidate — you know, the one who, um, also might be engaged in charity fraud.


38 Responses to “Potential Charity Fraud Exposes the Stark Choice Facing Voters in November”

  1. My plan, at this time, is to vote for neither; assess as best as I can which of the two is likely to be elected; and vote for the U.S. Senator* most likely to oppose, or vote to impeach, him or her. Meantime, I will copper-bottom my bets by staying on the good side of the powers that be in my city.

    *My vote will not make a difference for Congressman — it’s a safe district.

    nk (dbc370)

  2. i’m sure the fbi will be very very interested in talking to Mr. Ortel


    happyfeet (831175)

  3. For the love of God Patterico, just give it up. Please.

    Trump > Hillary.

    Even if only by a little. There isn’t a third choice.

    Stop. Please just stop.

    Concerns reader (097843)

  4. For the love of God Patterico, just give it up. Please.

    Trump > Hillary.

    Even if only by a little. There isn’t a third choice.

    Stop. Please just stop.

    Dear “Concerns Reader”:

    Your advice is noted, and rejected.

    There is always a third option. Resistance.

    It can take many forms. I am not talking about violence. I am talking about sticking with principles of the Constitution, liberty, and the free market.

    But make no mistake: we will resist.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  5. You should all vote for the possible fraudster who will more likely appoint three good supreme court justices.

    Fred Z (9ed538)

  6. bring the stank resist the stank love the stank resist the stank bequeath the stank resist the stank get the stank all up in the flag resist the stank let the stank ooze into every silly line in the constitution john roberts defiled resist the stank let the stank permeate the uniforms of our soldiers resist the stank let the stank roll off the lips of the children as they sing the praises of the stank

    the stank is all

    the stank is forever


    happyfeet (831175)

  7. If the poison is going to come out, the black-robed junta which, in 1803, hijacked the American Revolution should be part of it too.

    nk (dbc370)

  8. You should all vote for the possible fraudster who will more likely appoint three good supreme court justices.

    And will definitely appoint one.

    I’m not going to lie: that is a respectable argument for voting Trump. In my opinion, it is the only argument that could make sense. I personally don’t think it’s enough. But I think it’s silly to pretend that Hillary’s justice will be the same. Trump’s would be better. No matter how much you hate him, his would be better.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  9. In my opinion, it is the only argument that could make sense.


    it’s not just judges picklehead

    and you know this

    and you know how the left works

    you know about the march, the long long march through our institutions

    the left is good at this and like the native american on the squalid reservations

    they use every part of the buffalo

    every appointment is leveraged

    in the america you invite what we will see

    is that for 12 years anyone with credentials at the highest levels





    senior officials

    and on and on

    they will have been appointed by either food stamp and the stank

    and they will use these credentials

    they will have entree

    they will have influence

    they will have credibility

    and yes yes yes

    this is a zero sum game

    happyfeet (831175)

  10. It’s a long way to November.

    Colonel Haiku (1ebff3)

  11. they will have been appointed by either food stamp *or* the stank i mean

    happyfeet (831175)

  12. they will have been appointed by either food stamp *or* the stank i mean

    You should have thought of this when you had the chance to support the Kim Davis butt-snuffler and his Goldysacks wife.

    nk (dbc370)

  13. that’s not even a truism

    if i’d supported snuffles

    we’d still be where we are

    if snuffles hadn’t snuffled though

    if he’d cast a wider net?

    maybe we’d be in a different place

    i tried to warn him

    i was vocal i was clear

    and what was snuffles’ reply?

    he started squawking about predatory bathroom trannies


    this is a real thing that happened

    happyfeet (831175)

  14. There is zero reason to think Trump will choose good SCt justices. Zero. Nada. He is already reaching into Democrats circles for advise.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  15. ‘ow do you say in your country? Your argument rings hollow.

    You won on the social issues. Take your half-loaf. I’m content to give up the whole loaf, rathern than see Ace Rothstein and Ginger McKenna in the White House.

    nk (dbc370)

  16. Third party or independent candidate can’t be dismissed so readily as they’ve been in the past.

    Not with Clinton and Trump’s sky-high negatives

    They’re BOTH beatable… simultaneously

    Reaganite Republican (98e37e)

  17. it’s not just judges picklehead

    Something about that sentence made me LOL, probably because what followed it is an example that even hf can make an astute observation when he wants to. IOW, yep, the system is now so awash with mindless robo liberals — or “kinder, gentler” squishes at best — from one government agency to the next, that it will will take years and years of non-namby-pamby conservatism to make the federal government at least somewhat moderate or centrist.

    What a calamity.

    As for the Clinton Foundation being a big greedy slush fund? Is the Pope Catholic? (Actually, to be honest, the current Pope is so enchanted with secular liberalism, I don’t know if he’s even Christian).

    Mark (b2a63a)

  18. it is not hollow

    there is a chewy center or so we were led to believe

    a chewy constitutional center

    but every time teddy-pie talked constitution he turned around and bam all of a sudden he was auditioning for the 700 Club

    please to feel me

    reagan’s three-legged stool is as dead as he is

    let it go

    let’s move on

    happyfeet (831175)

  19. oh my goodness it’s after 1 am here night you guys

    happyfeet (831175)

  20. well there are some precursor, the carter foundation, became entangled with some shady characters from bcci, and at least one reputation conscience former class A war criminal and funder of the LDP. this is why I call these outfits spectre.

    narciso (732bc0)

  21. How many times does Trump need to commit fraud before people get a hint about this man’s complete lack of character?

    Ghost Rider (a9c557)

  22. So let’s map it out.

    Clinton, for whom if it were not for charity and/or insider trading would have no income at all, except for the stipend given to ex-presidents, has been guzzling down great gulps of ill gotten moneys.

    Trump, who is if not one of the most wealthy self made men in New York, definitely belongs on the short list, a billionaire several times over, set up a charity, not to make a point to the feral press and bring them inline with something resembling accountability, but to pocket a couple million.

    This is one of them most bs articles you’ve written Pat.

    Rivaling your “Trump wants to bone his daughter” beat-up for stupidity and inch deep analysis.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  23. Papertiger, if its BS, then it will be easy for you to tell us where the funds are.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  24. Tiny Donnie is self-made? Daddy Fred was self-made and gave Tiny Donnie the Manhattan division of his real estate business to get him “started”. Billionaire? Yeah, right.

    Bill Clinton came up from nothing to become President of the United States at age 47. At that age, Tiny Donnie was dumping his wife for a new chippie to help him get it up. As bad as Billy is, Tiny Donnie would not make a pimple on his ass.

    nk (dbc370)

  25. And poppy was entirely self made when he started in midland, please tell me another one.

    narciso (1b4366)

  26. “tell us where the funds are.”

    The funds never existed. Delivery of 50% by ol’ Bluster and Bullshit is actually much more than anyone should expect.

    Rick Ballard (44b7ba)

  27. papertiger,

    Trump is “self-made”?
    You must be joking. Except you’re not. And that is…sad!

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  28. no wonder they call Chicago the “Windy City”…

    Colonel Haiku (1ebff3)

  29. I have no idea what Trump will do. Neither, I suspect, does Trump. That said, there is a high probability that some of what he does that surprises him and us will be better than Hillary who will, we know, do only terrible things.
    It’s like rolling honest dice against dice the other guy controls.

    Richard Aubrey (472a6f)

  30. Associating Trump with honest dice is like…
    associating either Clinton with honest dice.

    John Hitchcock (18adbf)


    “Officer, there’s a weird man with a strange creature on his head trying to get into the White House!”

    nk (dbc370)

  32. #4 —

    Go ahead and resist, it’s a great idea, and I’m willing to join. But there are enough people “on my side” that can see the light, however dim. A vote not for Trump is a vote for Hillary.

    These are just two examples:

    Why I will still vote for Trump (e57951)

  33. A vote not for Trump is a vote not for Trump. If you want me to vote for Trump, you will have to make the case _for_ him. Not against Hillary.

    And since Trump and his syncophants seem to think that insults are brilliant campaign tactics, good luck with that.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  34. SPQR – every four years we hear the same version of that nonsense, if you don’t vote for Candidate Douchebag, you supported Candidate Assbandit.

    JD (2e3880)

  35. And since Trump and his syncophants seem to think that insults are brilliant campaign tactics, good luck with that.

    Isn’t that the very same tactic you and too many other Cruz supporters used leading up to the Primary elections?

    ropelight (67d9d7)

  36. It IS the most important election of our lifetime, and it HAS ALREADY BEEN STOLEN.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  37. Let’s not short change Trump in the fraud sweepstakes. Don’t forget Trump appears to have committed mail, wire, and financial fraud while ripping off easy marks (taking money from them was as easy as taking votes from a Trumptard) at his bogus Trump “University.” That’s the basis of the RICO/fraud cases he’s facing in Kali.

    It’s amusing; part of Trump’s defense is to argue that the marks should have known he was a fraud. And to argue it weakly, it appears.

    …Although Defendant may yet show that Plaintiff and the putative class members knew or should have known that the Defendant had devised a scheme to falsely market Trump University via mail or wire prior to October 2009, the Court is satisfied that determination of Defendant’s statute of limitations defense in this case will not defeat the predominance of common issues in this case.

    So, thanks, Trumptards. Now are choices are to vote for the establishment on-the-take influence peddling New York liberal facing charities fraud and Espionage act violations who happens to be married to Billy Jeff, or to vote for the establishment on-the-take influence peddling New York liberal facing charities fraud and RICO act violations who calls Billy Jeff for advice before deciding to run.

    Steve57 (412496)

  38. I’m sorry. The second choice should have read “or to vote for the establishment on-the-take influence buying New York liberal facing charities fraud and RICO act violations who calls Billy Jeff for advice before deciding to run.

    Trumptards, how Trump has treated these fraud victims should have been a cautionary tale. But if you were capable of learning from the examples of others you wouldn’t be Trumptards.

    He filed a defamation suit against one plaintiff that the 9th Circus Court ruled was baseless, filed only to harass her (most of Trump’s lawsuits are baseless harassment filed to bankrupt people he doesn’t like), and violated the Kali anti-SLAPP statute.

    Then know what Trump did, after losing his baseless, harassment lawsuit? He threatened to file another one against the plaintiff AND her lawyers. Because he can afford to keep doing this kind of thing longer than his former admirers can.

    He also set up a website defaming these plaintiffs. One thing he wants you Trumptards to “know” is that Trump “University” had an A rating from the Better Business Bureau.

    Meanwhile his lawyers are fighting tooth and nail to keep the BBB rating (and the details of other government investigations) out of court due to the fact it would be unduly prejudicial. Because in reality the BBB gave his “University” a D- rating as the final grade just before the business went under. Their second lowest rating.

    It’s a very Obamaesque move, no? Obama tells the public it’s a “fee, not a tax.” Meanwhile his Solicitor General is telling the Supreme Court it’s a tax, not a fee, which is why Obamacare is still with us (Roberts bought it, among other things).

    So now we have the Republican version of Obama. Both of them know their supporters are too stupid and so in love with their icons they will buy whatever they’re selling, no questions asked

    And remember. The people taken in by Trump “University” only did so because they love Trump, just like you. Trump can only rip you off you’re blinded by his YUUUGE personality and his sales pitch. And when the wool was lifted from the marks’ eyes and they realized they had been taken, there former idol attacks them and tried to assassinate their characters and bankrupt them.

    Read that excerpt from that judge’s ruling again, Trumptards. Trump was lying to them, but it’s their fault for buying those lies. So, no, he’s not giving them back the money he ripped off (at least, not yet; Trump has a history of settling these cases when it’s clear he’ll lose, despite his other public lies that he never settles).

    That’s how Trump will treat you, too, Trumptards, should the wool ever be lifted from your eyes. Not like I’ll be holding my breath for that to happen.

    Steve57 (412496)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5186 secs.