Bill Clinton defends foundation after Times details financial, management problems

[WestVirginiaRebel]

Fox News:

Former President Bill Clinton on Friday issued a lengthy defense of the foundation bearing his name in response to a New York Times article that detailed problems with the organization’s finances and management.

 

“I am immensely proud of what we've accomplished in the last 12 years,” Clinton said, in an open letter posted on the Clinton Foundation’s website.

 

The New York Times on Wednesday published an in-depth reportthat described internal debates and problems concerning the group's finances and the role of long-time Clinton aides.

 

The report said the foundation ran a $40 million deficit in 2007 and 2008. While some blamed the recession, it still ran a deficit of more than $8 million last year, the Times said.

 

Clinton, though, said the financial documents are “misleading.” He said the foundation is required to report multi-year commitments only in the year they are made. So, Clinton wrote, a $103 million commitment reported in 2005 and 2006 does not show up on future documents, even though it helps cover the foundation’s budgets.

 

“Like many foundations, we were hit by the economic slowdown in 2007 and the crash in 2008. Thankfully, we had the cash reserves to cover our largest budgets, in our HIV/AIDS, malaria, and health training programs, and we decided to do it because so many lives were at stake,” Clinton said. “For 2012, the reported deficit of $8 million is incorrect, and was based on unaudited numbers included in our 2012 annual report. When the audited financials are released, they will show a surplus.”

 

The Times also reported that some in the organization have raised concerns about the role of Clinton ally Douglas Band, who was helping run a consulting firm while also working on the Clinton Global Initiative. The firm and the Clintons' world reportedly were deeply intertwined, with Bill Clinton previously working as a paid adviser at the firm, while the firm brought in clients who also donated to the foundation.

________

 

The Foundation as an example of Democratic governance...

 

[SrWoodchuck]

@WestVirginiaRebel!

 

Interesting theory that NYSlimes is posting now in 2013....to inoculate Shrillary for 2016. If we bring it up & dismiss it now, she can blubber, "What difference does it make, now, in 2016?"

 

Kremlinology and the NYT’s Hit on the Clinton Foundation http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/08/15/kremlinology-and-the-nyts-hit-on-the-clinton-foundation/

 

The details of the NYT’s piece exposing the Clinton Foundation’s corruption, rent-seeking and influence peddling are fascinating in and of themselves. The Clintons remain what they have always been — ambitious, corner-cutting, morally bankrupt, power-hungry people who got into politics for all the wrong reasons. Some get into politics to help their fellow man or their country. The Clintons got into politics to help themselves and their friends. That has been their prime directive from the beginning. Well, that plus the other thing that motivated Bill — getting women.

 

The details lay out like this, briefly. The Clinton Foundation is run by loyalists, it raises vast piles of money, and runs deficits, while it acts as a launch pad for Hillary’s 2016 presidential run. How does a charity run deficits? Not because of an excess of generosity. How can a charity function as a presidential launch pad? The IRS should be asking that question along with asking about the deficits, but it isn’t. Or if it is, we’re not hearing about it.

 

The more fascinating question about the story, though, is who is behind it and why is it coming out now? What’s the motive behind its publication?

As for why now, well, it’s August 2013. Not August 2016. Most Americans aren’t paying attention to politics at all. That may work to the benefit of OfA too.

 

Had the story come out at the latter date it could have gravely damaged Hillary’s presidential run. Even Obama presumably doesn’t want to risk putting a Republican into the White House. But coming out now, the story won’t hurt Hillary’s presidential chances at all. It’s too far removed from the campaign.