'The truth is no one will ever be able to reconstruct completely the accounting required'
Bill and Hillary Clinton
A new report from the Free Beacon points out that there were many times when the “staggering” speaking fees paid to former President Bill Clinton came from “undisclosed third parties” even though Hillary Clinton listed “small foreign speaking firms” as the source.
Which was no surprise at all to Jerry Corsi, a WND senior staff writer and author of the new book “Partners in Crime: The Clintons’ Scheme to Monetize the White Hous...
“As I point out in ‘Partners in Crime,’ the Clintons used ‘front corporations’ to mask the identity of the person or group actually putting up the dollars to pay their speaking fees not only to avoid transparency, but more importantly as a central part of the criminal scheme behind the Clinton Foundation,” Corsi explained.
“As ‘Partners in Crime’ points out, to perpetrate the criminal fraud at the heart of the Clinton Foundation, the Clintons needed to make audited financial statements dense to read, summary in form, and impossible to trace back to the actual source of funds.”
The Beacon report said one situation developed when Bill Clinton on Oct. 30, 2009, spoke to people packed into the Park Lane Hilton in London.
“While Clinton’s speech helped raise a substantial sum for the prominent cricket charity, his staggering $290,000 speaking fee was not covered by the group, according to organizers. The fee also was not covered by ‘World Management Limited,’ the marketing company Hillary Clinton listed as the payment source in her federal financial filings,” the report said.
Instead, it was paid by wealthy British businessman named Robert Whitton.
The newspaper’s review found Hillary Clinton often listed “small foreign speaking firms as the sources of her husband’s lecture payments in her Senate and State Department disclosures, even though the actual paychecks came from undisclosed third parties.”
And some, like Whitton, had business pending before UNESCO, which gets a quarter of its funding from the State Department, which Hillary Clinton was running.
Corsi explained what was done.
“In many instances, the speaking fees appear to have been paid directly to the Clintons, by-passing the Clinton Foundation altogether. There is no public accounting or regulatory reporting for the shell corporation, WJC LLC, that Bill Clinton created so payments could be made to him and his wife directly. The ‘pass-through’ bank account maintained by WJC, LLC advanced the money-laundering scheme by borrowing a technique from international drug cartels and trans-national terrorist operations.”
He continued, “Over and over again, the Clintons devised fraudulent payment mechanisms, making a sham out of the audited financials the Clinton Foundation and its subgroups, including the Clinton Global Initiative, submitted annually to federal and state regulators.
“The truth is no one will ever be able to reconstruct completely the honest accounting required to determine who precisely was the source of the hundreds of millions of dollars the Clintons stole, in their elaborately designed and still on-going criminal inurement scheme designed to enrich themselves by violating virtually all laws written at the state and federal level to keep charities honest,” Corsi said.
The Beacon said, “Government watchdogs say the practice is troubling from a transparency perspective, because it obscures the actual source of Clinton’s hefty payments. While the Free Beacon was able to track down information on the likely funders of several of these speeches, at least 30 of them remain a mystery.”
The report said officials for the Hillary Clinton campaign as well as at Bill Clinton’s office declined to “provide the names of any actual payment sources.”
Ken Boehm, of the National Legal and Policy Center, a government watchdog group, like Corsi, opined that practice “suggests secrecy and non-transparency.”
He told the news agency, “While those paying the exorbitant fees have included special interests with lobbying efforts to influence federal policy, even more troubling is the fact that the true financial sponsors are sometimes hidden through cut-out middlemen or anonymous donors. The tens of millions in speaking fees going directly to the Clintons should be completely transparent. Anything less suggests unethical conduct.”
The Beacon said its investigation found a lack of transparency was “routine.”
“Hillary Clinton disclosed that 16 of her husband’s speeches, which brought in nearly $4 million, were paid for by ‘World Management Limited’ or ‘World Celebrity Event, Ltd.,’ Mallorca-based speaking bureaus run by a former celebrity promoter named Onni Nordstrom,” the report said.
But it said Clinton’s staggering speaking fees appear nowhere in World Celebrity Event, Ltd.’s annual financial reports.
Laura J Alcorn