96 Percent of Hillary Clinton’s ‘Charitable’ Donations Went to Her Own ‘Slush Fund’

One thing we’ve learned about the Clintons since the early 90’s — follow the money.

Whether it’s the get rich scheme in which Hillary mysteriously turned $1,000 into $100,00 overnight in cattle futures, to Buddhist monks (who had taken vows of poverty) yet gave thousands in political contributions to the Clintons, from selling the Lincoln Bedroom to the highest bidder, to the looting of the White House after Bill Clinton’s second term ended, from Hillary, a horrible speaker, curiously receiving over $250,000 for 45-minute speeches, to Hillary approving an Russian uranium deal for a donor who’d given $2 million to the Clinton Foundation while secretary of state. The Clintons have used politics for one reason and one reason alone — to enrich themselves even when it means skirting the law.

On Friday, Hillary Clinton released her 2015 tax returns and almost all of her “charitable” contributions are about as you’d expect from a member of the Clinton Crime Family.

Out of the politically greedy Clinton’s over $10 million in income for 2015, $1,042,000 was designated for charity. $1,000,000, or 96 percent of the total, was given to the Clinton Foundation, an organization so bathed in slime that the FBI recommended that the group be investigated for corruption, a request that Obama’s attorney general, Loretta Lynch denied.

The Clinton Foundation is so shady that last year the nation’s most trusted charity watchdog put it on its “watch list” of non-profits exhibiting troubling and suspicious activities.

Charity Navigator, which rates nonprofits, recently refused to rate the Clinton Foundation because its “atypical business model . . . doesn’t meet our criteria.”

“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 in April of last year.

Moreover, as much as 90 percent of the money contributed to the Clinton Foundation does not go to charitable grants. That 90 percent went to payroll for their crony associates, travel, hotel expenses, fundraising, and other “overhead.” Only roughly 10 percent went to actual charity.

Of course, Hillary Clinton could have chosen to give her charity directly to real charities, where more of the money would go for actual charity. But it’s not about charity, it’s about laundering money back to themselves and their crony pals.

Like most progressive leftist Democrats, real charity is something other people do, despite the appearances.

About the Author

Matthew K. Burke
Matthew K. Burke
A former Washington State U.S. Congressional candidate in 2010, Matthew attended the nation’s first modern day Tea Party in 2009 in Seattle, Washington. He also began writing and blogging that year. Matthew became a Certified Financial Planner in 1995 and was a Financial Advisor for 24 years in his previous life. Matthew was one of the three main writers leading a conservative news site to be one of the top 15 conservative news sites in the U.S. in a matter of months. He brings to PolitiStick a vast amount of knowledge about economics as well as a passion and commitment to the vision that our Founding Fathers had for our Republic.

Send this to friend