The Clinton Foundation has taken center-stage as the latest controversy surrounding Hillary Clinton. Never able to spend a moment without Federal authorities investigating her, a probe into the Clinton Foundation began shortly after the FBI’s investigation into her use of a private email server concluded.
We’ve reported previously that the Foundation amounts to a charity in name only. In 2013 for example, the Foundation spent a meager 10 percent of the revenue they brought in on charitable grants – which is the same amount they spent on travel. The remainder of the funds went towards salaries, rent, IT, and all other expenses. By contrast, charities like the American Red Cross or Doctors Without Borders give over 90 cents on the dollar. In other words, the percent they contribute to charity is about equal to Clinton’s overhead. Such a poor translation of revenues to charity would put the Foundation on the list of America’s worst charities.
So where the heck is all that money really going? That’s what everyone is dying to know. Is it simply a crummy, inefficient charitable organization run by someone even less qualified to run a country, or is there cronyism going on?
Via the New York Post
Charity Navigator, which rates nonprofits, recently refused to rate the Clinton Foundation because its “atypical business model . . . doesn’t meet our criteria.”
Charity Navigator put the foundation on its “watch list,” which warns potential donors about investing in problematic charities. The 23 charities on the list include the Rev. Al Sharpton’s troubled National Action Network, which is cited for failing to pay payroll taxes for several years.
Other nonprofit experts are asking hard questions about the Clinton Foundation’s tax filings in the wake of recent reports that the Clintons traded influence for donations.
“It seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for the Clintons,” said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government watchdog group where progressive Democrat and Fordham Law professor Zephyr Teachout was once an organizing director.
In July 2013, Eric Braverman, a friend of Chelsea Clinton from when they both worked at McKinsey & Co., took over as CEO of the Clinton Foundation. He took home nearly $275,000 in salary, benefits and a housing allowance from the nonprofit for just five months’ work in 2013, tax filings show. Less than a year later, his salary increased to $395,000, according to a report in Politico.
Braverman abruptly left the foundation earlier this year, after a falling-out with the old Clinton guard over reforms he wanted to impose at the charity, Politico reported. Last month, Donna Shalala, a former secretary of health and human services under President Clinton, was hired to replace Braverman.
Nine other executives received salaries over $100,000 in 2013, tax filings show. The group also failed to disclose millions of dollars it received in foreign donations from 2010 to 2012 and is hurriedly refiling five years’ worth of tax returns after reporters raised questions about the discrepancies in its filings last week.
An accountant for the Clinton Foundation did not return The Post’s calls seeking clarification on its expenses Friday, and a spokesperson for the group refused comment.
What should we expect from the investigation into the Foundation? If the FBI’s investigation into Hillary’s private email server is any indication, we’ll learn that she broke the law repeatedly – and there’s nothing we can do about it.
[Note: This post was authored by Matt Palumbo. Follow him on Twitter @MattPalumbo12]