by Charles Ortel
This matter can shake the globalist, Deep State swamp off its heretofore protected foundation.
President Trump’s acquittal on impeachment charges is welcome, but hardly the best news of the week. For, unnoticed until recently, another court proceeding advances, and win or lose, this matter can shake the globalist, deep state swamp off its here-to-now protected foundation.
The case in question is Lawrence W. Doyle and John F. Moynihan (Petitioners) v Internal Revenue Service (Respondents), a case where allegedly corrupt actions of the Internal Revenue Service itself may fall under the microscope. It likely involves as yet unprosecuted crimes by “charities” that are still corruptly directed by household names. For history of this case, and some tantalizing details, see here.
The names of Petitioners in the U.S. tax court case are familiar to many -- Doyle and Moynihan are self-described “financial bounty hunters” who are determined to police the waste, fraud and abuse that has grown exponentially of late, especially because the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice and Internal Revenue Service seem loath to go after the biggest of fish -- dynastic political families, billionaire donors, and all who enrich themselves at taxpayer expense.
In December 2018, Doyle and Moynihan threw down ample evidence of malfeasance by the network of loosely-affiliated Clinton Foundation “charities” before a Congressional oversight hearing chaired by Congressman Mark Meadows:
Most in the mainstream media ignored their testimony and its potential implications, but Sara Carter noticed and her work was picked up by the massive audience of concerned citizens who follow zerohedge.com
Meanwhile, U.S. Attorney John Huber, who was slated to appear, did not bother to attend or even to send a stand-in. All was quiet on the Huber front after the December 2018 hearing until an unconfirmed report erupted in corporate or billionaire-owned media early in January 2020, starting with this piece in The Washington Post.
Though it should not be so, the deck is stacked against patriots like Doyle and Moynihan and other whistleblowers who correctly question suspicious, arguably criminal acts allegedly committed by people who must know better -- highly educated and acclaimed “public servants” who once held and still aspire to hold the highest government positions in this and other nations.
Why, today, are charities still used to launder dirty money, and then to trade it for influence?
The answer is as simple as it is sad -- because fraudtsers can do so with impunity.
To date, very few charity frauds have been prosecuted, and then chiefly against lower level grifters, not the rotten, core group that has tentacles in both political parties here inside the United States, and in counterparts worldwide.
Leaky bucket: The “business model” for charity fraud
In the United States, charities are readily exploited because the primary regulators, based in most states or territories and in certain localities, do not have resources or bandwidth to investigate or to prosecute large, complex schemes to divert donations, illegally, for political campaigns, or to enrich those who must be bought off. This is particularly so in the case of charities that claim they engage in work outside the United States, where even the F.B.I. has a hard time cracking the facade of charity frauds.
Fake charities can open bank accounts and then divert donations away from intended, worthy recipients whose faces we see, and appeals we hear so frequently across the media complex.
Who actually checks whether a given charity is lawfully organized in each jurisdiction where it operates?
Who regulates what a given charity has been authorized to do to advance its professed goals?
And who cares whether a charity – the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation to pick one -- actually changed its name lawfully since incorporation on Oct. 23, 1997?
That task falls to people like Doyle and Moynihan, as well as others who fight to protect integrity of the nonprofit sector.
Frankly, financial institutions and governments worldwide are still not careful enough when it comes to performing diligence on purported charities. This is crystal clear when it comes to the network of Clinton Foundation “charities”.
For example, to great public fanfare, John Kerry released a “Memorandum of Understanding” supposedly negotiated by Dec, 12, 2008 that would, in theory, mitigate potential conflicts among Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, and an entity described in the document as “William J. Clinton Foundation” (see here).
Jason Goodman and I, since June 2017, have shared more than two hundred detailed podcasts -- see the playlist here -- which demonstrate, beyond doubt, that “William J. Clinton Foundation” was not lawfully organized or operated before, on, or after Dec. !2, 2008, a fact that the incoming Obama Administration Team likely would only have discerned after Jan. 20, 2009, once they found a copy of this memo dated Nov. 10, 2008, made available through the Podesta WikiLeaks release during 2016.
Why have so many Presidents allowed their Administrations to grant deference to predecessors to operate and potentially profit personally from stewarding Presidential Records?
Put differently, when did operating Presidential “Foundations” become a tool to transform politically ambitious families into phenomenally wealthy, almost royal dynasties?
Connecting the Dots Between Clinton Charity Frauds and Trump-Era Hoaxes
President Trump made clear just now that his Administration intends to learn and then expose why, and with what resources, plotters in both political parties worked so hard to support Hillary Clinton when she was a viable candidate and then to obstruct Donald Trump from the moment he secured his first election victory, right through to the present -- see here.
Animus against Trump runs deep; many anti-Trump plotters are in thrall to unregulated globalism, a project begun in earnest around 1988 that hollowed out the heartland, shuttering factories here to employ less expensive workers in loosely policed foreign nations. For more than thirty years, globalists squeezed private sector workers, as American and foreign oligarchs reaped the spoils of their late, great gambles. In time, this approach may become known as “futilism” -- impoverishing workers to make them dependent upon profligate governments only “works” inside ivory towers, and then, just in theory.
This is an era that the Trump Administration has started to end. It may have been a fun ride for those who today operate near monopolies, and grease political wheels using opaque charities. But, long-overdue reckoning nears.
Follow the Doyle and Moynihan case, and follow developments with regard to “charities” affiliated with Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, wishing the Trump Administration success in efforts to rebalance equal justice, under law, by policing all larger, tax-exempt organizations, particularly those operating internationally.
Photo credit: YouTube screen grab
The case in question is Lawrence W. Doyle and John F. Moynihan (Petitioners) v Internal Revenue Service (Respondents), a case where allegedly corrupt actions of the Internal Revenue Service itself may fall under the microscope. It likely involves as yet unprosecuted crimes by “charities” that are still corruptly directed by household names. For history of this case, and some tantalizing details, see here.
The names of Petitioners in the U.S. tax court case are familiar to many -- Doyle and Moynihan are self-described “financial bounty hunters” who are determined to police the waste, fraud and abuse that has grown exponentially of late, especially because the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice and Internal Revenue Service seem loath to go after the biggest of fish -- dynastic political families, billionaire donors, and all who enrich themselves at taxpayer expense.
In December 2018, Doyle and Moynihan threw down ample evidence of malfeasance by the network of loosely-affiliated Clinton Foundation “charities” before a Congressional oversight hearing chaired by Congressman Mark Meadows:
Most in the mainstream media ignored their testimony and its potential implications, but Sara Carter noticed and her work was picked up by the massive audience of concerned citizens who follow zerohedge.com
Meanwhile, U.S. Attorney John Huber, who was slated to appear, did not bother to attend or even to send a stand-in. All was quiet on the Huber front after the December 2018 hearing until an unconfirmed report erupted in corporate or billionaire-owned media early in January 2020, starting with this piece in The Washington Post.
Though it should not be so, the deck is stacked against patriots like Doyle and Moynihan and other whistleblowers who correctly question suspicious, arguably criminal acts allegedly committed by people who must know better -- highly educated and acclaimed “public servants” who once held and still aspire to hold the highest government positions in this and other nations.
Why, today, are charities still used to launder dirty money, and then to trade it for influence?
The answer is as simple as it is sad -- because fraudtsers can do so with impunity.
To date, very few charity frauds have been prosecuted, and then chiefly against lower level grifters, not the rotten, core group that has tentacles in both political parties here inside the United States, and in counterparts worldwide.
Leaky bucket: The “business model” for charity fraud
In the United States, charities are readily exploited because the primary regulators, based in most states or territories and in certain localities, do not have resources or bandwidth to investigate or to prosecute large, complex schemes to divert donations, illegally, for political campaigns, or to enrich those who must be bought off. This is particularly so in the case of charities that claim they engage in work outside the United States, where even the F.B.I. has a hard time cracking the facade of charity frauds.
Fake charities can open bank accounts and then divert donations away from intended, worthy recipients whose faces we see, and appeals we hear so frequently across the media complex.
Who actually checks whether a given charity is lawfully organized in each jurisdiction where it operates?
Who regulates what a given charity has been authorized to do to advance its professed goals?
And who cares whether a charity – the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation to pick one -- actually changed its name lawfully since incorporation on Oct. 23, 1997?
That task falls to people like Doyle and Moynihan, as well as others who fight to protect integrity of the nonprofit sector.
Frankly, financial institutions and governments worldwide are still not careful enough when it comes to performing diligence on purported charities. This is crystal clear when it comes to the network of Clinton Foundation “charities”.
For example, to great public fanfare, John Kerry released a “Memorandum of Understanding” supposedly negotiated by Dec, 12, 2008 that would, in theory, mitigate potential conflicts among Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, and an entity described in the document as “William J. Clinton Foundation” (see here).
Jason Goodman and I, since June 2017, have shared more than two hundred detailed podcasts -- see the playlist here -- which demonstrate, beyond doubt, that “William J. Clinton Foundation” was not lawfully organized or operated before, on, or after Dec. !2, 2008, a fact that the incoming Obama Administration Team likely would only have discerned after Jan. 20, 2009, once they found a copy of this memo dated Nov. 10, 2008, made available through the Podesta WikiLeaks release during 2016.
Why have so many Presidents allowed their Administrations to grant deference to predecessors to operate and potentially profit personally from stewarding Presidential Records?
Put differently, when did operating Presidential “Foundations” become a tool to transform politically ambitious families into phenomenally wealthy, almost royal dynasties?
Connecting the Dots Between Clinton Charity Frauds and Trump-Era Hoaxes
President Trump made clear just now that his Administration intends to learn and then expose why, and with what resources, plotters in both political parties worked so hard to support Hillary Clinton when she was a viable candidate and then to obstruct Donald Trump from the moment he secured his first election victory, right through to the present -- see here.
Animus against Trump runs deep; many anti-Trump plotters are in thrall to unregulated globalism, a project begun in earnest around 1988 that hollowed out the heartland, shuttering factories here to employ less expensive workers in loosely policed foreign nations. For more than thirty years, globalists squeezed private sector workers, as American and foreign oligarchs reaped the spoils of their late, great gambles. In time, this approach may become known as “futilism” -- impoverishing workers to make them dependent upon profligate governments only “works” inside ivory towers, and then, just in theory.
This is an era that the Trump Administration has started to end. It may have been a fun ride for those who today operate near monopolies, and grease political wheels using opaque charities. But, long-overdue reckoning nears.
Follow the Doyle and Moynihan case, and follow developments with regard to “charities” affiliated with Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, wishing the Trump Administration success in efforts to rebalance equal justice, under law, by policing all larger, tax-exempt organizations, particularly those operating internationally.
Photo credit: YouTube screen grab
Charles Ortel
Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/02/forget_about_impeachment_heres_a_legal_case_that_actually_matters.html
Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter
No comments:
Post a Comment