This is funny. What we do without ethics experts, but where have they been all these years when the Clintons were receiving donations to their slushfund, er, foundation?
Ethics Experts Alarmed By Nearly 100% Decrease In Clinton Foundation Donations Since $250 Million Peak In 2009
The Daily Caller ^ | December 04, 2021 1:07 PM ET | Jack GreenbergThe Clinton Foundation’s rapid decline in donor cash has alarmed top ethics watchdogs who say it shows clear red flags of political corruption.
No kidding? Just because donations spiked before elections and prospective changes of administrations?
Remember how we kept getting teasers about FBI investigations of the Clinton “Foundation”? What happened with those? I’m too lazy to research possible criminal violations, but in a country with an honest DoJ there’d be some serious examination of both donors and donees. And where are all the Pulitzers for investigative journalists looking into this scandal—America for sale to the highest bidders/donors?
Follow the link(s) for more.
Charles Ortel has written extensively about the crimes of the Clinton Foundation:
>> https://charlesortel.com/ <<
He's some sort of financial expert, especially in regard to non-profits.
This is why foundations need to be taxed on any unspent funds. Pro-rata the basis and realized gains and tax them. University endowments the same. Also limit private foundations to a 15-20 year life. They were envisioned to allow people getting large sums of income to spread out their donations (following something like the sale of a business). They have become a way to build wealth without the hassle of taxes or inheritance every other entity must face. Tiger and Carousel live them, but creating a way for some entities to avoid taxation with only a promise of future “charitable” use is terrible tax policy. We don’t tax unrealized gains because they haven’t become cash reality, we shouldn’t allow foundations and endowments to avoid taxes for the same reason - the charitable spending isn’t yet cash for a cause reality.