Clinton Foundation Largest Unprosecuted Charity Fraud in History-Charles Ortel

charles ortel pBy Greg Hunter’s (Early Sunday Release) 

Wall Street financial expert Charles Ortel claims the Clinton Foundation is the “largest unprosecuted charity fraud in world history.” He also says this global fraud could not be pulled off without a lot of help.  Ortel explains, “I think this is an example of a vast left-wing conspiracy.  If you go back into the history, the Clintons always like to expose the things that go down for their credit, and they always try to hide the stuff that doesn’t make them look so good.  When you go back into the history of the Clintons, Bill and Hillary, and now Chelsea, have been monetizing government service.  They have been operating as Robin Hood in reverse.  Stealing from the poor to reward their rich cronies. . . . I think what you have here is a case study on the proponents of the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party, and they tend to be left-leaning, how these people got together and figured out a charity where foreigners can give unlimited amounts of money, and U.S. players can give unlimited amounts of tax deductible money to an entity.  This could be a preferred vehicle for strengthening the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party and Clinton interests around the world.”

Even though the Clinton Foundation is an official charity with a so-called “501(c) 3” designation from the IRS, Ortel says it’s not functioning as a legitimate charity. Ortel charges on his website that “Clinton Foundation documents omit crucial facts, include false and materially misleading statements, and exclude legally required audits of financial statements for each year of operation, that must be prepared on a consistent basis.”

Ortel also explains, “There are two sides to the coin. I think Peter Schweizer (Clinton Cash author) and his team have done a very good job of exposing this very difficult to expose pay-to-play stuff.  I doubt there are criminals dumb enough who sit down and write memoranda in great detail and say ‘alright, you give me $1 million and I’ll give your this ambassadorship.   Let’s sign on the dotted line here.  Please wire the money to this account.’  I don’t think you are going to find those types of records.  At the end of the day, even if you write a great book, and the book is good, and even if you do a movie and the movie is good, at the end of the day, the skeptical press is going to say there is no evidence.”

Ortel goes on to say, “On the other hand, on charity fraud, it’s a very different thing. In charity fraud, unlike pay-to-play, you don’t have to prove intent.  Under New York State law, in particular, the requirement is merely that you prove the public filings in the Clinton Foundation are false and materially misleading, and they certainly are. This is why you are starting to see these editorial boards around the world say wait a minute.  You also have to prove that they solicited, not that they raised money, that they solicited.  That, the Clintons have admitted. . . . On the charity fraud side of life, that is the mine field for the Clintons.  The second the IRS, or any attorney general or a state taxing authority, decides to make an issue of this, the burden of proof shifts . . .  the charity has to come forward and prove the affirmative case.  The Clinton Foundation has to prove, since October 23, 1997, that all you have been doing exclusively is furthering the authorized tax exempted purposes, which as far as I know is, to be merely a research facility and archive based in Little Rock.  Prove that’s all you have done.  Show us the legally audited financial statements.  Show us those audits.”

In closing, Ortel contends, “This is a tale that needs to be told, but it’s not going to be a tale that people swallow at first blush given the fact how powerful the Clintons are or how vengeful the Clintons are when they are in power. . . . Another way to talk about the Clintons is the Bonnie and Clyde of charity or the Al Capone of charity.”

Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with Clinton Foundation researcher, Charles Ortel of

(There is much more in the video interview.)

After the Interview:

Charles Ortel writes consistently about the Clinton Foundation and the Clintons. All of his analysis and updates are free and open to the public on

Stay Connected
  1. Gina M Mancarella

    Greg, Do you really contend that this hit piece on the Clintons is fair and unbiased ? What would you think if CNN did a hit piece like this on Trump ? This style of mudslinging journalism is way beneath you. I am absolutely appalled. Regarding the foundation, their goal is to bring relief and by extension some social justice to the world. Just because some people simultaneously worked for the government while working in a non-profit charitable organization doesn’t make it illegal. I know quite a few people who participate in United Way or AARP Foundation or American Heart Association just to name a few. It is not illegal and it is not fraud. If you don’t like the law, tell your congressman and get a new law passed and everyone can readjust their model. This Ortel guy is totally misleading and you should be able to see through him right away. Recall his assertions that Obama is not a US citizen ? Never proved. Please Greg. Please turn away from this type of egg nog jouralism before its too late. Before Nooone takes you seriously.

    • Greg Hunter


      With all the questions swirling around pay-to-play and emails it is a fair question to ask if the Clinton Foundation is actually functioning as a charity. If it is then they can easily rebuff this story. I have pulled the documents that are available on the Clinton Foundation website. There is the original filing for the Clinton Library in October of 1997, and then a 501 (c) (3) approval for the Clinton Global Initiative Inc. in October of 2010. That’s it. Where has the money gone? They must have records. They are required to have proper accounting by law not just here but in most countries. $14 billion was collected in the name of Hati relief alone. The people in Hati say they received very little. Where is all that money? Let’s see the accounting for the AIDS relief that Clinton Foundation has been doing. Charges of a massive charity fraud will be an easy thing to disprove. It is not a “hit piece” to ask for accounting and records from a global charity who’s top member is running for President. If you have a connections to book Hillary Clinton for an in-depth interview on her Foundation, I will be happy to give her all the time she wants to explain what is going on with her charity.


      • Gina M Mancarella

        Greg, lets look at an example. Lets take the United Way for example. Did you know that if you give a dollar to the United Way and even if you earmark it for a particular purpose, only a fraction ends up at the target destination because administrative costs are often very comprehensive. Often only a few pennies per dollar. Theres the bricks and mortar, energy, utilities, stationary and salaries among many other costs. Yes, Some of the salaries may be thought to be extravagant, but often are required to get the best people for the job. As I am sure you know, Regional directors often require hundreds of thousands of dollars to secure their services. Otherwise, they will just stay in the private sector. Please be responsible when reporting things such as this.

        • Greg Hunter

          If the Clinton Foundation is a real functioning charity, then ,proving this will make Hillary and Bill look like saints. If they cannot prove it, then it just charity fraud. It is really this simple. I feel I am on solid ground putting this question out there. By the way, I find it odd a “housewife” such as yourself, happens to be the very first comment on this post.

          • dave

            Greg, i feel like you have been really fair and unbiased regarding this poster. To anyone who reads your website regularly i think it’s pretty clear this person is a troll. Probably on the payroll troll for NSA, Clinton Foundation, etc…

            If it was me i would have been banned her a while ago, but hey it’s your website. 🙂

            • Greg Hunter

              Gina is giving us information and perspective every time she posts something.

              • helot

                For reasons mentioned by Greg in the past, and today, I am glad Gina is allowed to comment.

                Anyway, I don’t know if Thomas DiLorenzo coined the term or not, but every time I see the acronym, ‘CNN’ I think of, The Clinton News Network.

                Sometimes, I laugh. Other times, it’s kind of sad. I mean, how low can a, ‘news station’ and the people there go?