Clinton Foundation Donors Expected ‘Benefits in Exchange For Gifts’

A “governance review” was completed by a prominent law firm. They concluded the Clinton Foundation has a weak, rubber stamp board of directors and he Clinton foundation donors expects benefits in exchange for their donations and gifts.

Clinton Foundation Donors

Clinton Foundation Donors

Per The Daily Caller:

take our poll - story continues below

Who is most likely to win the Democrat nomination?

  • Who is most likely to win the Democrat nomination?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Think Americana updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The blistering review — made public Thursday by WikiLeaks — described a tax-exempt public foundation with none of the independent oversight required under federal charity law. The Clinton Foundation reported $187 million in net assets in 2011.

The review was conducted by the New York law firm of Simpson Thacher and was requested by Chelsea Clinton who had profound misgivings about the operation of her parent’s foundation. Leading the review was Victoria Bjorklund, one of the nation’s top-ranked legal experts on good-governance practices for foundations and charities. She came out of retirement to lead the review.

She created and previously headed Simpson’s tax-exempt group which advises public charities, private foundations, boards, and donors. Bjorklund was named “2014 Nonprofit Lawyer of the Year” by Best Lawyers Magazine.

Simpson Thacher found numerous weaknesses in the Clinton Foundation’s management structure, including a board consisting entirely of insiders loyal solely to Bill and Hillary Clinton, the board’s failure to oversee finances properly, inherent conflict of interests and the use of audits based on cash accounting rather than the federally mandated accrual basis. (RELATED: Clinton Foundation Ignored All ‘Best Practices’ For Good Governance)

But most serious disclosure in the review was that donors expected a “quid pro quo” in return for their contributions. “Some interviewees reported conflicts of those raising funds or donors, some of whom may have an expectation of quid pro quo benefits in return for gifts.”

So there it is. The Clinton Foundation donors expected benefits in exchange for their gifts and donations. Pay to play as it has been called regularly.

Like and share on Facebook if you are sick and tired of the Hillary Clinton lies and scandals.



Previous New Email Leak Proves Hillary was Using Obama's Muslim Beliefs Against Him
Next Wikileaks Email Leak Reveals Hillary's Benghazi Cover-Up

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.