Clinton Foundation Admits It Broke The Law In Leaked "Smoking Gun" Memo

Tyler Durden's picture

While there are conflicting reports whether the FBI may or may not indict the Clinton Foundation, which as the WSJ reported last week is being investigated by various FBI teams, even as other parts of the Bureau - and the DOJ - seek to squash the probe, the latest dump of Podesta emails has revealed a critical, confidential memo from prominent New York lawyer Kumiki Gibson to Clinton Foundation Chairman Bruce Lindsey (and former Bill Clinton attorney) which was performed as part of an inside audit of the foundation, and confirms that the charitable organization (which it found "operates more like a political operation") was engaged in practices that broke the law.

Bruce Lindsey serves as the chairman of the Board for the Clinton Foundation

As Gibson, who according to her resume "counseled the William J. Clinton Foundation, an international not-for-profit organization, on structural, legal, and compliance issues” from May 2008 until January 2014, wrote the purpose of the confidential November 10, 2008 memo, was to "set forth the findings of my review of the Legal and Human Resources Departments of the William J. Clinton Foundation (“Foundation”) and those pertaining to other areas of the Foundation revealed during this review, and my recommendations to the Foundation based on this review."

The summary reveals serious reservations about the viability of the foundation - which "operates more like a political operation" than a "professional, strategic, and sustainable corporation committed to advancing its overall mission" - if and when Bill Clinton were to depart and "the Foundation has to rise and/or fall on its own name and work only."

While the Foundation has grown impressively over the past several years, it has a number of fundamental organizational challenges and deficiencies that undermine its effectiveness, expose it to significant risk, and, ultimately, threaten its long-term survivalThe Foundation (as opposed to its initiatives, which I have not reviewed) operates more like a political operation focused on immediate situations, tasks, and events, as opposed to a professional, strategic, and sustainable corporation committed to advancing its overall mission.  While that may not be a problem while the President is personally involved in the Foundation -- and can garner support based on that involvement -- it will be a problem when he is no longer involved, and the Foundation has to rise and/or fall on its own name and work only.

The chief risks identified in Gibson's outside review, stem from both its Legal and Human Resource Departments, as well as Bill Clinton's unwillingness to "allow the Board and CEO to make the changes necessary for it to become sustainable, even great."

If the leadership (that is, the Board and the CEO) intends and wants the organization to survive beyond the President’s personal involvement, then it must take measures to move the organization onto a path of sustainability, starting with revamping both the Legal and Human Resources (“HR”) Departments; reviewing its corporate structure and governance documents; and, perhaps most importantly, having a frank discussion with the President about the current state of the organization, the future of the organization, and his appetite and willingness to allow the Board and CEO to make the changes necessary for it to become sustainable, even great.    

As the summary concludes, "the time for making these changes, if they are desired, could not be better:  The presidential campaign, which distracted some key employees and caused uncertainty among others about the future of the organization, is now over; virtually all of the employees interviewed are anxious for more structure, professionalism, and mission-focus; and funders are expecting the same."

Next follows a detailed and highly critical analysis of the Foundation's (1) shared values, (2) strategy, (3) structure, (4) systems, (5) staff, (6) style, and (7) skills, which the review finds "the Foundation to significant legal and reputational risks, results in inconsistencies and inefficiencies, and undermines its work and viability" and leads to the following conclusion about the CF's operational shortcomings:

The assessment of the organization through the 7-S Framework makes clear that the organization is not operating as effectively or efficiently as it should or could.  Indeed, it has major deficiencies in each of the fundamental areas.  Each of these deficiencies, standing alone, threatens the effectiveness of the Foundation in the short and long term.  When combined, as currently the case, they threaten its very existence (absent the President’s involvement).    

The outside legal review of the Clinton Foundation is that, at least operationally, the only thing that was keeping the enterprise going was the presence of Bill Clinton, whose anchor role to match donors with "uses of funds" and subsequent distribution of favors , aka "pay for play" made the former president indispensable in an organization that would otherwise not survive:

Because it is unclear whether the President wants the Foundation to exist beyond his personal involvement, the Foundation’s leadership (that is, the Board and CEO) should address this question head-on with the President.  That will require a frank discussion with the President about his desire, willingness, and appetite to move the Foundation to the next level of development.  If the President concludes that he does, in fact, want the Foundation to survive and thrive beyond his involvement, then he should authorize and empower the CEO and Board to make the changes necessary for this survival.

* * *

However, while all of that is troubling, and suggests that the CF was - from day one - just a corporate extension of Bill Clinton's persona, it was in no way illegal. Where the alarm bells go off, however, is taking a look at page 9 of the memo, where Gibson does a review of the Foundation's "Legal and HR Departments", something troubling emerges, which perhaps the FBI may want to take a particularly close look at. The following:

No matter what the leadership decides about the larger, over-arching question, it must act immediately to bring the Foundation into compliance with the law and standards that govern not-for-profits, and must create strong legal and HR offices so to prevent any lapses in the future

The memo also notes that "the Foundation has very few procedures, processes, and systems in place, and even fewer that are consistent across the organization.  For example, it is missing several policies/procedures that are required by law (e.g., record retention policy).  Moreover, although it has an employee manual, that manual is not comprehensive and is not distributed or followed consistently across the organization."

What makes this (systems) deficiency particularly problematic is that (1) the organization is legally liable for the acts of its offices and initiatives and those who run them; (2) managers in key positions have no to little experience in not-for-profit management and thus do not even possess the right instincts when faced with a problem for which there is no policy or procedure; and (3) there is no established mechanism for catching problems and mistakes.  

Gibson's take: "In short, the systems deficiency subjects the Foundation to significant legal and reputational risks, results in inconsistencies and inefficiencies, and undermines its work and viability. "

Simply stated, as of the day the memo was written, the Foundation was not in compliance with the law and with standards that govern "not-for-profits."

* * *

Among the policies and procedures that Gibson found missing or inadequate at the Foundation were the following, some of which - such as the procedures the CF was utilizing in Harlem -  may be in violation of the law. Here is a brief sample of the findings:

  • The Foundation lacks important policies and procedures and a real process to ensure compliance, resulting in increased risks, confusion, conflicting (and perhaps arbitrary) decisions, and inefficiencies.  
  • The Foundation does not have a record retention policy, and the procedures currently utilized in Harlem may violate the law.
  • It is unclear whether lower level employees actually meet the definition of exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
  • Processes and employment decisions are made on an ad hoc basis. 
  • Staff complained about the lack of comprehensive and/or written policies and procedures.
  • Staff complained about the lack of a real complaint and/or whistleblower policy.

And many more.

Furthermore, and more troubling, the review pointed to a high-ranking but unnamed foundation executive who was “being paid by [President Clinton], the government and the foundation” who “allowed the foundation to host what may have been (or may have been viewed as) a political event, apparently without official pre-approval from the foundation’s legal department and without regard, before the fact, to the impact of that decision on the foundation’s tax exempt status.”

While the conclusion avoids repeating the explicit accusation of operating outside of the law - we assume Gibson did not want to scare the Clinton Foundation too much, and thus avoid repeat work - it is a stark condemnation of the underlying practices and principles of operation:

The challenges and deficiencies plaguing the Foundation cannot be over-stated:  They are real and undermine the organization’s effectiveness, immediately and more long term.  To address the issues that present immediate threats, the Foundation should revamp its Legal and HR operations, should review its governance structure and documents; and should have an open and honest discussion with the President about the future of the Foundation

It is illegal for tax-exempt non-profit foundations like the Clinton Foundation to be linked with partisan political events as described in the review report.

The Lindsey memo was distributed just two days before the Clinton Foundation signed an agreement with Obama’s transition office Dec. 12, 2008, as part of the president-elect’s decision to appoint Hillary Clinton as the nation’s chief diplomat. Obama wanted assurance that no conflicts of interest would arise between Clinton’s work as Secretary of State and the foundation, which had operations in numerous foreign countries.

It is unclear if any of these recommendations were implemented, or if the CF is now in "compliance with the law and standards that govern not-for-profits." It is clear, however, that at least at one point it was not. It remains to be seen if such illegal activity will be grounds for the DOJ to permit the FBI to do its job and indict a foundation that, as lawyer determined, was operating in a fraudulent fashion.


Full leaked memo below (link):

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Croesus's picture

This bitch has gotta go! 

She's gotta get cooked like a Spirit! 

Never One Roach's picture

Thoughts Bill Clinton's Pedo Island reminds me of some bizarre scenes from Bosch's Garden of Eearthly delights.

PrayingMantis's picture



... re: Bruce Lindsay ... "In 1996, in the midst of the Whitewater controversy, Lindsey was named as an "unindicted co-conspirator" in a lawsuit involving Herby Branscum Jr. and Robert M. Hill, the co-owners of the Arkansas-based Perry County Bank, which financed Clinton's fifth gubernatorial campaign in 1990.[5][7] When the bankers were cleared, his case fell into abeyance.[7] By 1998, in the midst of the Bill Clinton sexual misconduct allegations, which led to his impeachment, Lindsey was subpoenaed by Ken Starr and testified before the grand jury on the suspicion that he silenced Clinton's alleged victims. ..."




... birds of the same feather ...


MANvsMACHINE's picture

Where the hell is Anonymous? Fifth of November is running short.

Deathrips's picture

Spoiler Alert!

Goldman Sachs Wins the s-Election no matter what.



847328_3527's picture
Boston ‘shadow donor’ scandal casts shadows on Democrats nationwide


A scandal out of Boston is pretty embarrassing for all those Democratic Party claims to be concerned about dirty money in politics.

Liberal politicians across the country are rushing to return donations from the small Thornton Law Firm, a personal-injury shop that used “bonuses” to reimburse at least $1.4 million of partners’ political donations.

Holier-than-thou Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and her PAC hauled in nearly $130,000 in Thornton money.

Worse, Pocahontas at first refused to give the cash back after The Boston Globe broke the story — bending only after Hillary Clinton, President Obama and others did the (obvious) right thing.


The "Toowannabee Tribe" has renounced the corrupt Pocahontas Warren in the past and renewed their criticism of her crookedness.

janus's picture


I work all weekend, leaving me little time to post.  But before heading off again for wages, I wanted to share something:

I'm pretty sure they're going to allow a legit vote on Tuesday; in fact, I'm almost certain of it.  A legit vote will mean a massive Trump win.  The reason I'm certain Trump will win and the numbers will be fair is that they do have additional stuff on Trump -- I doubt it's anything catastrophic -- probably just embarrassing -- but, still, they do have a few other things.  I'm therefore concluding that they're going to hold whatever these things are in reserve to potentially use them once he's in office for policy-based blackmail.  

congrats, guys.  


Whoa Dammit's picture

For those wondering why Bernie rolled over for Clinton :

Looks like they were blackmailing him.

BaBaBouy's picture

Im SURE MSM'er Lester Holts Will Be Reporting This TONIGHT, Along with the Satanist Connections Uncovered ~~~

jefferson32's picture

Tyler, when are you going to break the pedo-Clinton #Pedosta scandal? Erik Prince/Breitbart is not a negligible voice. The evidence gathered on 4chan and reddit is overwhelming. Wikileaks even alluded to it. Just check this one email out ! (read the invite at the end of the thread). You owe it to your readers, Tyler.


Hobbleknee's picture

"Uber Service to transport Ruby, Emerson, and Maeve Luzzatto (11, 9, and almost 7) so you’ll have some further entertainment, and they will be in that pool for sure."

Did I just read what I think I read?

Manthong's picture


A basket of indictables.

Manthong's picture

I correct myself…

A shit-bucket of indictables.

Theosebes Goodfellow's picture

~"Clinton Foundation Admits It Broke The Law In Leaked "Smoking Gun" Memo"~

So what? Who gets indicted? Who goes to jail? Where TF is Loretta Lynch? Where's a freakin' grand jury?

"Mrs Lynch?!?!"

CuttingEdge's picture

Speaking of "Lynching"...

If the impossible happens* look at people close to Trump who may be senior players post-election. Mike Flynn springs to mind on military and intel etc who appears more than capable.

Imagine for a moment, if you will,  Jeanine Pirro as AG (not sure if she has the pre-reqs) - and the bitch fight with Loretta and Hillary that would undoubtedly ensue.

That would be worth your vote all on it's own.


* This election isn't just important for the US - the ease of Brexit (or its hindrance) is dependent on the outcome. Trump has the UK's back on everything Brexiteers (the majority) stand for. Hillary is owned by the same cunts in banking who funded Remain.

PT's picture

At this stage what I want to know is, where are all the Classified emails?  Wasn't that (one of) the original problems?  Wikileaks has so far leaked 50 000.  Did anyone find some Classified?  Or did the FBI already have all the Classified ones?

WOAR's picture

Not to defend these people, but that e-mail isn't enough. Maybe "Our Gang" is the name of a play, and the children will be in it. Maybe, when they referenced that they will be in the pool, he meant to say that they will be guaranteed to love it (he mentioned it in regards to weather, as well - maybe the kids enjoy swimming but didn't expect they would be able to?)

Of course, if you just asked the kids what was going on...

But who does investigative reporting these days, anyway?

PT's picture

I'm predicting all the emails will be forgotten on Wednesday, even any incriminating ones.  Of course I could be wrong, but I don't think so.

847328_3527's picture

Where do Hillary and PedoPodesta get that "fresh breast milk" and Fresh sperm" to mix in with th eother ingredients for their "spirit meeting"?

CuttingEdge's picture



Has a ring to it.

Joe Davola's picture

So he was a convenient foil the whole time, bet the Bernie supporters feel like door mats. Waiting for the email that shows how much he and the super delegates were paid.

Jim in MN's picture


Something about avoiding subpeonas and this:

i guess I know the answer >>> they wanted to get away with it

onewayticket2's picture

this article establishes they knew they were outside the law....


and here they are crafting her DNC speech and a key point about getting "dark money" out of the process....


"We need stronger > disclosure laws, to get dark, unaccountable money out of our politics."


their entire platform is just smoke and mirrors.  or, i guess, it's merely her "public" stance.....her "private" stance is something else entirely.

S.N.A.F.U.'s picture

Look at the bottom of the mail - I'm thinking that if they didn't want their emails hacked/leaked, they probably shouldn't be using google groups:

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HRCRR" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to To post to this group, send email to

Chris Dakota's picture
Chris Dakota (not verified) Whoa Dammit Nov 5, 2016 7:18 PM

Bernie was her foil, he said early on "Everyone needs to just stop with these emails."

Is that what you saw when you're running against someone?


Bernie Shill.

CheapBastard's picture
Hillary’s MASSIVE MELTDOWN "If that f - - - ing bastard wins, we all hang from nooses!

PT's picture

He said she said.  What about straight from the horse's mouth?

Whoa Dammit's picture

For those wondering why Bernie rolled over for Clinton :

Looks like they were blackmailing him.

Son of Loki's picture

Hillary Clinton even lies about lying about her lies

Notwithstanding these manifest misrepresentations, Clinton falsely claimed Comey had verified the truthfulness of her public statements about the email controversy when he said he didn’t have any basis to charge her with lying to the FBI. Then she said that whopper was based on a misunderstanding, which clearly wasn’t true. In other words, she lied about lying about her lies.

Chris Dakota's picture
Chris Dakota (not verified) janus Nov 5, 2016 3:13 PM

Trump women, women, womens..

Venus in Cancer...smooch, smooch, drool...its a thing with Venus there.

Maybe Mary Ann Trump didn't breast feed Don.

I mean we knew it was women, at least they are

Publius Maximus's picture


Always wanted to know where The Donald got his hairstyle from.


Dancing Disraeli's picture

Unless they have footage of Trump diddling underage girls, he's pretty much already been inoculated from further sexual accusations.   Don't think they have the leverage, short of that.

Mycroft Holmes IV's picture

I disagree that they have something on Trump or that there will be fair elections.

Only a landslide will prevent the steal, but there could be inner forces at work to prevent it as well.

Steve Pieczenik has released his third video:

If the Satanist stuff that came out yesterday is true, and if the rumors of evidence of child sex trade found on Wiener's computer are true, we could be heading for a Constitutional crisis where half of the Federal government becomes implicated in major felonies.

The irony is whether the electorate will care.

Amazing time to be alive.

Joyo Bliss's picture

It'll make the 1970s UK House Of Lords page boy scandal seem like it was like from the '70s . . . A lifetime ago. It seems. I was a paper boy at the time. Delivering papers every day. I read the front page on pretty well all of them as I delivered them. Pretty gross stuff.

This scandal is like high fructose corn syrup as opposed to sugar. Nah, high fructose corn syrup is only 170 times more sweet than sugar. It's way worse than that.

But then again, high fructose corn syrup is a poison. Your body doesn't know what to do with it, so it wraps it up in fat cells and deposits it somewhere in your body. Hillary's particular brand of poison is pretty insipid, it seems. And quite similar to high fructose corn syrup. The US system can't stand the poison, and deposits all those fat cells in DC.

Clara Tardis's picture

Charles Ortell goes off on this. -that it is the smoking gun and goes all the way to the wh. Today interview
"Why The Clinton Foundation Will Bring Down Hillary Clinton"

sushi's picture

Obama wanted assurance that no conflicts of interest would arise between Clinton’s work as Secretary of State and the foundation, which had operations in numerous foreign countries.


What is most curious about the above quote is the fact that the entire stated legal purpose of the Clinton Foundation is the creation and operation of a Presidential Library in Arkansas.

Not sure why it needs to have operations in "numerous foreign countries" in order to achieve that objective.


johngaltfla's picture

Screw all that, let's hope this is true!

WOAH! Hillary Caught On Hot Mic Trashing Beyonce’ With RACIAL SLURS!



“I’m grateful, but do we really need to listen to this ghetto trash music? Doesn’t she have something a little less…negro?”

Man do I hope someone recorded that....because they are holding $1 million from TMZ.

WTFUD's picture

Hillary's new name is Dirty Harry; she hates niggers, spics, chinks and honkies earning less than her. Don't you just love this sweetheart?

I'm sure she'll be rewarded a the ballot-box.

CuttingEdge's picture

Gordon Brown? Meet Mrs Duffy.

Please God someone find a recording.

francis_the_wonder_hamster's picture

Great find....thanks for sharing.

WTFUD's picture

Murder-Suicided - Destroy the Evidence. Brilliant Hillary you really want this job , don't ya? Expect more killing's before Tuesday.

bIlluminati's picture

Michael Brown, FBI, is Anon no more. Pining for the fnords.

CuttingEdge's picture

If this agent was involved in any way with the CF investigation, his (and his wife's, sick fuck above) demise would send the entire FBI nuclear. And probably the DC PD as well since he was one of theirs.

GUS100CORRINA's picture

As sad as this may sound, if this couple were Born Again Children of GOD, they are in heaven right now looking down on this sorry mess in America.

I am most certain that the Lord is saying to each of them, "WELL DONE GOOD AND FAITHFUL SERVANTS, WELL DONE."



cornflakesdisease's picture

Eccl. 9:5: “The living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all.”

Chris Dakota's picture
Chris Dakota (not verified) JackT Nov 5, 2016 4:18 PM

Looks like Benghazi.

She's a monster.


A few years ago I said to someone very savvy "We are going to have a revolution"

He said "We already had one in 2008.  With the first words out of his mouth I knew he was a Marxist"

AtATrESICI's picture

I would like to say unbelievable.

bIlluminati's picture

I got scammed by a fake news site. Denver Guardian is not on this list. And I just noticed this: , which reputable newspapers don't have.

If you can, go ahead and pull this.