I checked the search and couldn’t find anything on Canada’s financial contribution. Of course child funding is mentioned.
I'm wondering if the Clinton Foundation was a front for global involvement in many money making schemes, (children to name one via child agencies or protective services and schools.) One of the below articles considers it was an umbrella for intn'l laundering.
The federal government has quietly given Bill Clinton's charitable foundation a special designation that will allow it to receive indirect support from Canadian taxpayers.
The government's move means the former U.S. president's charity, called the William J. Clinton Foundation, can now issue tax receipts to Canadian donors and receive grants from Canadian charities.
That's a big advantage because Canadians generally can't donate to foreign charities and receive a tax break, and Canadian charities can't make grants to international charitable organizations (the only exceptions are gifts to the United Nations and some foreign universities attended by Canadians).
Without this designation, a Canadian giving $1-million to Mr. Clinton's foundation received no tax saving. Now that donor will get a tax break worth as much as $450,000.
The rare move was not publicly announced and it's not clear why the Arkansas-based foundation was selected. The Clinton foundation focuses on poverty, health and environmental issues around the world, but it is not particularly large by U.S. charity standards, with about $260-million in assets.
Charity experts say the process for getting this kind of special exemption is shrouded in mystery. "It is not transparent how organizations get on the list and one may wonder about favoritisms," said Mark Blumberg, a Toronto lawyer who works with charities.
Only a handful of foreign charities have received this designation. Until Mr. Clinton's foundation joined the list, five charities had this status: two Swiss-based organizations connected to the Aga Khan; the New York-based Council for Canadian American Relations; the Foundation for Canadian Studies in the United Kingdom; and the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars…..continued.
Did I get this right? Canadian taxpayers are forking over the cash, or did I read this incorrectly?
What is the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars?
Why the hell would the Canadian government use taxpayers money to fund an international center for Scholars? We already know from another recent thread that Canada’s McGill university was used to provide human guinea pigs and sacrifices for ritual. Could that be closed down and moved under the protective shield of Washington? It makes sense that Washington DC would be a good shield and cover from prying eyes.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 records.
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation *
Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (Canada) *
Fred Eychaner and Alphawood Foundation
Frank Giustra, The Radcliffe Foundation
Nationale Postcode Loterij
The Children's Investment Fund Foundation
At issue is a $600,000 grant to her family’s charitable foundation.
It was a donation for youth employment programs in Colombia and it didn’t cause any controversy last year when it was announced by Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development as a contribution to the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.
But it has found new life in an American political story.
An early knock against Clinton’s still-unannounced presidential bid is the notion that she’ll be in a quasi-permanent state of conflict-of-interest thanks to the almost $2 billion (U.S.) pumped into the family foundation by deep-pocketed philanthropists around the world — many of whom have business concerns before the U.S. government.
This week, U.S. media started noting all the donations by foreign governments — which had been mostly suspended while she was secretary of state but have resumed since she left government.
That’s where the Canadian donation comes in.
The Wall Street Journal pointed out cash from the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Australia, Germany and a certain Canadian “government agency promoting the Keystone XL pipeline.” Clinton had previously worked on the Keystone file as secretary of state, and could oversee it in the future if she becomes president.
Other news reports led specifically with the Canadian angle.
One example was the congressional newspaper, the Hill. Its story began: “A Canadian government agency promoting the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Bill and Hillary Clinton’s non-profit.”
96% of the Clintons’ 2015 Charitable Donations Were to Clinton Foundation
by Alex Griswold | 1:27 pm, August 12th, 2016
96 percent of the roughly one million dollars given to charity by Bill and Hillary Clinton in 2015 was given to the Clinton Family Foundation, a tax-exempt charity controlled by the Clintons. continued.
Clinton Foundation Provides Details on Canadian Donation
It says the funds linked to chairman of a uranium firm went to a charity separate from the foundation
By Siobhan Hughes and James V. Grimaldi
The Wall Street Journal
April 26, 2015 7:55 p.m. ET
The Clinton Foundation on Sunday offered its first response to an allegation that it failed to report $2.35 million in donations from a Canadian foundation run by the chairman of a uranium company who was seeking U.S. approval to sell his firm to the Russian nuclear agency.
In a statement, Clinton Foundation acting chief executive Maura Pally said the donations went to a separate Clinton charity, the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership-Canada.
The donations came between 2008 and 2012 from the Fernwood Foundation, a family charity of Ian Telfer, chairman of the Canadian company Uranium One at the time of its 2009 sale. The company owned one of the largest uranium mines in the U.S. and therefore required approval of its sale from a U.S. committee consisting of the State Department and eight other departments. The panel let the deal proceed, and the company is now owned by Rosatom, Russia’s nuclear agency.
A spokesman for Hillary Clinton, who was secretary of state at the time, said she had no involvement in the matter and didn’t discuss it with the department official designated to decide the issue. The campaign issued a statement from the official saying he never heard from Mrs. Clinton on the matter.
1,100 donors to a Canadian charity tied to Clinton Foundation remain secret
The number of undisclosed contributors to the charity, the Canada-based Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership, signals a larger zone of secrecy around foundation donors than was previously known.
Details of the organization’s fundraising were disclosed this week by a spokeswoman for the Canadian group’s founder, mining magnate Frank Giustra.
The Canadian group has received attention in recent days as a potential avenue for anonymous Clinton Foundation donations from foreign business executives, including some who had interests before the U.S. government while Hillary Rodham Clinton was secretary of state.
The partnership, named in part for Bill Clinton, sends much of its money to the New York-based Clinton Foundation. Two of the partnership’s known donors — Giustra and another mining executive, Ian Telfer — are featured in the soon-to-be-released book “Clinton Cash” for their roles in a series of deals that resulted in Russia controlling many uranium deposits around the world and in the United States. Continued on link.
The amount of child care agencies in Canada, many of them charity fund raising agencies, are staggering numbers, compared to the fact that Canada has a smaller population than the whole of California, and like USA the child welfare protective system is identical in it's lack of $ for making a difference in the lives of children. It's identical in EVERY way.
Meanwhile, The Daily Caller reports Friday that FBI has started multiple probes into the second Clinton Foundation with the help of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York. That report comes after CNN reported Wednesday that the Justice Department had turned down the FBI’s request to open a probe into the potential conflict of interest.
I guess we know why the DOJ turned down request to open an investigation, but that in itself sounds like a shell game, because they all know they're cover-upperers (as Breitbart would call them.) One diffuses blame on the other, while the other looks admirable for requesting a probe, while their all complicit either in omission or commission.
Did companies and countries buy state department access by donating to Clinton foundation? continued on link.
Why would countries buy access?
What are they accessing?
We already know that the big illegal money makers are drugs and child trafficking.
All other imports and exports are easily registered.