American Thinker

by Charles Ortel

    Francis Bacon (1561-1626)

    In his active political career, Bill Clinton, at times, displayed genius. However, his post-presidency defines how an arrogant, proud person can cruelly destroy a charity’s ability to perform good works lawfully.

    Francis Bacon, an intellectual giant, understood that true charity only benefits the recipient. Bill is the opposite. In thousands of pages of word torrents, Bill seems to suggest that activities pursued through “his” foundation served as a kind of personal redemption.

    Neither public good nor personal redemption, however, appears in Clinton’s “charity” documents. In required public filings, Bill and his family never explain why a Little Rock library and research center reimbursed the Clinton family's global travel and staff expenses from January 2001 onward. Nor do the Clintons document the many personal benefits they have received from donors to “their” charity.

    These defective filings, all made under penalties of perjury, along with the contradictions in recent sworn testimony before the House Oversight Committee, are a minefield of increasing danger for Bill and his family.

    Once an adept liar, Bill and his “defense” team abandoned the pretense of truth-telling in key instances during his recent appearance before the Oversight Committee. We know this from a close reading of key details in the long transcript.

    Tax-exempt nonprofit corporations are required to file truthful public records under state, federal, and foreign laws as they solicit donations and conduct operations in furtherance of their authorized purposes.

    What is more difficult is when a dynastic political family raises funds from donors seeking favors while simultaneously working to win election contests, develop business opportunities, and proclaim that they, somehow, are engaged in noteworthy charitable endeavors.

    When you look through “Audited Financial Statements & IRS Form 990s” on the “Clinton Foundation” website, you will discover that there are no audits linked to the seven years from 1998 through 2004, key years for Bill and Hillary. Unless you are familiar with the strict requirements in states such as New York, you may not understand that “The William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation” (the actual legal name of the Arkansas nonprofit corporation), as it admits on its website, never fully complied with the New York state requirement to procure an independent audit of its declared financial results.

    New York regulations, which should have mattered immensely to transplanted residents, one of whom sought a high political office from a base in the Empire State, are strict for excellent reasons. Policymakers, legislators, and lawyers working within the Attorney General’s Charity Bureau in New York understand that “leaky” entities, posing as legitimate charities, can become porous vehicles that trade valuable political favors for difficult-to-trace cash, at considerable cost to taxpayers and to the integrity of charitable giving.

    To meet New York requirements, audits for “The William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation” had to be conducted by a truly independent firm of licensed professionals. These required audits should have complied fully with American accounting standards, in all material respects, from the charity's incorporation on 23 October 1997 through 31 December 2004, six weeks after the Clinton Presidential Center opened on November 18, 2004.

    Instead, Bill Clinton’s eponymous “charity” still provides, to use a technical New York term, “bupkis” for those pivotal formative years from 1997 through 2004.

    In his recent sworn testimony, Bill tries to take credit for “his” work “fighting HIV/AIDS” from 20 January 2001 onwards and, grudgingly, admits to connections with Jeffrey Epstein in these supposedly charitable endeavors and work for the “Clinton Global Initiative.”

    X screen grab (cropped).

    To 12.4 million followers on X, Bill claims to be “founder of @ClintonFdn.” Nevertheless, he is not listed as a Trustee, Director, Officer, or Key Employee of “The William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation” or of any alleged successor organization until a date uncertain after November 2, 2013, when Bylaws for “Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation” may have been amended and restated.

    Moreover, robust claims about Bill Clinton’s initiatives from 2001 through 2013, made in numerous books (e.g., here, here, and here) and press releases, are not supported by disclosures that should have been made in myriad states, including New York. These missing disclosures include details about the identities of governments that may have made specific grants, the amounts of each grant, and the purposes of each grant.

    As for the “Clinton Global Initiative,” solicitations occurred, and meetings were held in New York starting in 2005. Nonetheless, there has never been any kind of audited accounting for this theoretical “charity,” nor have required disclosures been made of related party transactions, potential personal benefits, or political activities.

    Perhaps Joe Biden set a key precedent, namely, that we do not prosecute affable yet feeble former presidents when they repeatedly lie under oath.

    One sure thing about Bill Clinton is that he has not aged well since January 19, 2001, when he reached an agreement with Robert Ray concerning his testimony under oath regarding a relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

    Another thing that is clear from the available public record is that Bill Clinton had a closer relationship with Monica Lewinsky than he ever legitimately had with “The William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation,” or any other “Clinton Initiative” from 23 October 1997 through 1 November 2013 (search here using the Employer Identification Number for the main “organization:” 31-1580204).

    No matter how much they might wish it were otherwise, popular politicians and their families are not “organizations” to qualify for and maintain exemption from taxation. Bill Clinton and at least two other persons had to cause a nonprofit corporation (under Arkansas law) to be “organized” and then “operated” in full compliance with relevant laws and regulations.

    Any fair reading of the law and the public record leads to the conclusion that “The William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation” failed to meet basic legal requirements before 23 December 1997, when initial Bylaws may have been adopted by Trustees, and certainly through 1 November 2013.

    With more revelations likely to come soon, the known public record is already perfectly clear—whatever Bill Clinton may have been doing with Epstein or with Ghislaine Maxwell, it certainly was not “charity.”