What the heck is the Clinton "Global Initiative"? What about those huge sums of money?

[pnwmom]

Last edited Tue Aug 23, 2016, 01:44 AM - Edit history (10)

The Global Initiative is part of the Clinton Foundation, but it is not a charity and doesn't provide grants. It is an organization set up to help "leaders and visionaries" connect and inspire each other. It is an international networking and educational resource. To that end, the GI holds conferences around the world. Membership costs $20,000 per year, though there are "complementary memberships" to NGO's, non-profits and others who qualify. (So those who can afford the membership fee are subsidizing the complementary memberships.)

At these conferences, members make public commitments for projects in line with GI goals. But the GI doesn't supervise any of these projects or funnel any money related to these projects. It is just an educational and networking group for philanthropists, political leaders, and others who are working on projects in their own countries and with their own resources.

So those huge sums of money that are connected in the media with the Global Initiative never go to the Clinton Foundation at all. If someone makes a "commitment" or a "pledge" at a Global Initiative conference, that means that person is announcing a project he or she is conducting INDEPENDENTLY, which is in line with GI goals.

https://www.clintonfoundation.org/clinton-global-initiative/about-us/cgi-model

CGI Model

The Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) convenes leaders to drive action through its unique model. Rather than directly implementing projects, CGI facilitates action by helping members connect, collaborate, and make effective and measurable Commitments to Action.



COMMITMENTS TO ACTION

CGI member commitments represent bold new ways to address global challenges – implemented through new methods of partnership and designed to maximize impact. Commitments can be small or large, global or local. No matter the size or scope, commitments help CGI members translate practical goals into meaningful and measurable results. To support the development of commitments among members, CGI facilitates conversations, provides opportunities to identify commitment partners, showcases the actions taken by commitment-makers, and communicates the results of the work.

To date, members of the CGI community have made more than 3,500 commitments which have improved the lives of over 430 million people in more than 180 countries.


INFORMATION ABOUT MEMBERS:

https://www.clintonfoundation.org/clinton-global-initiative/membership/frequently-asked-questions

Since 2005, CGI Annual Meetings have convened more than 190 sitting and former heads of state, 21 Nobel Prize laureates, and hundreds of leading CEOs, heads of foundations and NGOs, major philanthropists, and prominent members of the media.

SNIP

While most organizations pay a membership fee to join, CGI also has complementary memberships. These are typically extended to NGOs, nonprofits, and social entrepreneurs who may not be able to afford membership but represent an important constituency or issue area and can bring a valuable voice to the collaborative and diverse CGI community.

BROAD AREAS OF WORK OR "TRACKS" THAT MEMBERS ARE INDIVIDUALLY INVOLVED WITH:

https://www.clintonfoundation.org/clinton-global-initiative/about-us/tracks


THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

EDUCATION & WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

ENERGY

ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP

FOOD SYSTEMS

GLOBAL HEALTH

MARKET-BASED APPROACHES

RESPONSE & RESILIENCE

TECHNOLOGY




___________________________________
CONNECTION TO THE CLINTON FOUNDATION:

The Global Initiative is a project of the Clinton Foundation. The Foundation itself is a charity that has been given an A rating by Charity Watch, and has been listed as one of Charity Watch's top charities for "Peace and International Relations."

clintonfoundation.org

https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillary-chelsea-clinton-foundation/478

[guillaumeb]

1. Starting with the first paragraph:

The Global Initiative is part of the Clinton Foundation, but it is not a charity. It is an organization set up to help "leaders and visionaries" connect and inspire each other. It is an international networking resource. To that end, the GI holds conferences around the world. Membership costs $20,000 per year.

At $20,000 per year for a membership, this is obviously not aimed at the bottom 90% of working people. It seems more like a date night set up where people with ideas look for wealthy backers.

That does not in itself make the ideas or the goals either beneficial or harmful to the majority of American workers. That would require far more information about the end results as well as what type of ideas are most likely to be funded.

[pnwmom]

3. Obviously it is not an org for working people. It is an org for movers and shakers who share

the goals of the GI.

[guillaumeb]

4. Again, without knowing what projects typically are funded,

there is no way to assess the effectiveness of the goals, not their impact on the country.

Thanks for the information/link.

[pnwmom]

9. Again, the Global Initiative doesn't fund any projects other than its own conferences

and meetings..

The point of the OP iis that the million and billion dollar projects that are publicized through the GI are NOT funded by the GI and their funds are not controlled by the GI.

[guillaumeb]

21. I read the link you provided, and a few others.

And my limited reading leads me to agree with you, but that will not stop Trump from trying to manufacture issues.

Thanks

[Moonwalk]

23. Nothing will stop Trump from manufacturing issues....

Or did you miss the "Obama created Isis, literally" speech? My point being, if you're saying that Clinton's foundation should be more clear, more different, or more whatever in order to stop Trump making things up, that's a lost cause. Trump will never stop making things up. There will be lies and innuendos on his headstone. The point HERE is to make sure that democrats understand what the deal is. Trump and the republicans have and WILL post messages on boards like this saying all innocently, "I want to vote for Hillary, but that charity is so suspicious...."

Trying to seed doubts in us voters. Well, here is what its all about. It isn't sinister. You may or may not like that it involves coordinating and networking philanthropists, but it DOES give free memberships to those with ideas who are not wealthy, and cannot afford it, but should be part of it. It's clearly about generating ideas for a better world.

You can quibble about whether it's a waste of time, or whether it's working towards its goal the right way or the wrong way. But is it not a con job, a way of lining people's pockets. Republicans have spent decades making sure no one trusts Hillary. It's really easy to whisper something in someone's ear and get them wondering. This helps them to stop wondering about this, if nothing else.

[guillaumeb]

25. Agreed. That is why I recommended the post.

If I were Trump I also would be trying to do all that I could to distract and divert voters. Polling so far seems to show his distractions are failing.

[pnwmom]

30. Exactly. We all saw, with what they did to John Kerry, that every Dem will be smeared,

no matter what. He was a war hero and they turned him into some kind of fraud and coward.

It's up to us to keep the facts straight.

[Hortensis]

31. Important post, PNW. Thanks. I'd love to ask

the media, each time they mention the Foundation and its works only to deliberately sabotage its reputation, if they don't admire, for instance, saving the lives of many thousands of babies and children by providing a ridiculously inexpensive antidiarrheal medicine. They'd have to agree, even if it were always followed by a weak rallying but!

Between the Foundation's many on-the-ground projects and the thousands of Global Initiative projects, no one would ever run out of ways to enlighten.

Admitting just how awesome the Foundation's goals achieved and planned are would require admiring the Clintons, so the Foundation's reputation is continually attacked. But good people simply don't oppose good works, much less the noble efforts of thousands of people at work in many nations around the globe.

[PatSeg]

34. This is true

It would be nice if the media and Democrats would portray the Foundation in a more accurate and positive light. The media is leaving the impression that there is something dishonest and unseemly about it.

[Hortensis]

41. On purpose, I am sure. Many "talking heads" have

spent years badmouthing the Clintons to be part of the "in" group, and portraying the foundation accurately would create a strong cognitive dissonance. Bad Clintons, good Foundation?

[PatSeg]

42. Yes, it is so pervasive

that when people hear "Clinton", they unconsciously have a negative reaction. Too many years of negative press and republican talking points has taken hold in the public's consciousness. You really have to be tough and resilient to go into politics, especially if you are a Democrat.

[Hortensis]

44. Sadly, so many good people aren't. Especially on the

right. People like the Kochs drove almost all moderate conservatives out of politics in DC in and red states, in favor of hard-core reactionaries. But with gridlock in so many states and DC, also Democrats

You'd appreciate our congressman, Patseg. He's a proud, hard-right member of ALEC and skilled spouter of all the usual rabble-rousing catchphrases. The only real challenge to him in this primary was by Paul Broun, whose old district had been redrawn. Broun's claim that the Big Bang and evolution are lies straight from the pits of hell, is only one of many...fun things. Like warning that the federal government would be calling to monitor each household's daily vegetable intake if we didn't fight for our freedom. (Remember the outrage when Michelle suggested we feed our children more salad?) And we had thought nothing could make our incumbent look acceptable.

[PatSeg]

47. It is hard to believe

that in this day and age, people like that make it to congress. Do you remember that clown Joe Walsh from Illinois? I can't believe people actually voted for him. Evidently if you have no marketable skills whatsoever, you just run for congress. Or to paraphrase a well worn cliche, "Those who can do; those who can't run for congress."

[Hortensis]

48. The "skill" needed is willingness to sell your vote.

I had a good laugh when I read that many of these people getting elected as a first step to lobbying riches just won't stay bought. They keep hitting industry people up for more and more. Actually make the extremist ideologues chosen by the Koch types seem almost as principled as they think they are in comparison.


Meantime, the media trashing the Clintons find it necessary to also trash the efforts of many thousands doing good works with them around the planet. One of the talking heads actually seriously suggested they rename the foundation after some long-dead presidents to dissociate themselves from their good works. It would certainly make the media's gross hypocrisy and dirty works that much less obvious.

[PatSeg]

52. "Won't stay bought"

Its almost like blackmail. Sigh, money and politics = terrible combination.

[Hortensis]

57. Well, you know the saying about honest crooks.

It is sort of reminiscent of extortion, isn't it? The extortees all so deserve it, and so do we for letting this happen.

[sarae]

76. Yes, unfortunately, that's exactly it.

It makes me angry that years of attempted smears have resulted in a negative Pavlovian reaction to the Clinton name. I even get a slight feeling of dread upon hearing her name now, just because I'm so used to it being accompanied by a negative characterization.

[PatSeg]

78. And what is really sad,

is that we get this reaction to her, not so much him. I can't think of any reason why SHE deserves this other than she is a woman, a smart powerful woman.

It really bothers me that there have been times when I have bought into this negative portrayal of Hillary. She is not a natural on the campaign trail and I know this does not come easily for her, but the pervasive negativity goes far beyond that. She has even been blamed for her husband's infidelity. I know there is a lot of hatred for the Clintons on the right, but I think we are seeing a hatred that could be applied to any woman who would dare to seek higher office, not just on the right.

[sarae]

79. Yes!

That always sets me off! The fact that some people blame her for Bill's infidelity is just absurd.

I've heard so many people say, "Oh, if it were Elizabeth Warren, she would do much better," which is easy to say when Warren isn't the one running. A few articles examining Warren's past have shown that when she is running for a position, she faces almost exactly the same criticism Clinton has faced.

http://qz.com/624346/america-loves-women-like-hillary-clinton-as-long-as-theyre-not-asking-for-a-promotion/

http://bluenationreview.com/warren-faced-nearly-identical-likability-and-honesty-challenges-as-hillary/

I don't even want to think about the criticism she'll face when she does become president. We'll see whether it's worse or better than what Obama had to endure.

[PatSeg]

80. The right has accused Hillary of being an enabler

to her husband. So when a wife has a cheating husband or even worse, an abusive one, it is somehow HER fault? Bill Clinton left office with very high approval numbers, but Hillary gets attacked more than ever.

As president, I think Hillary will face nonstop criticism, but on the upside, she is more than prepared for it. She's endured 25 plus years of this crap, and she will probably be a better president because of it. I am not sure that Obama was as prepared for the animosity and obstruction that he encountered. He was ready to compromise, but the republicans idea of compromise was "Do it our way or else". He's come a long way!

Oh well, guess we have to get through to November before we worry about her presidency. Hopefully she'll have the congressional support she needs to actually govern.

[csziggy]

70. The goal for the Clinton Global Initiative is to encourage others to make commitments

All those wealthy people and organizations that attend the CGI meeting discuss problems and ways to solve those problems. CGI helps them come up with concrete plans to do that.

Commitments to Action

A Commitment to Action—the defining feature of CGI—is a plan for addressing a significant global challenge. Commitments can be small or large and financial or nonmonetary in nature. Many commitments are the result of cross-sector partnerships, with CGI members combining efforts to expand their impact. To date, members of the CGI community have made more than 3,500 commitments which have improved the lives of over 430 million people in more than 180 countries.

CGI supports the development of commitments by facilitating dialogue, providing opportunities to identify partners, showcasing the actions taken by commitment-makers, and communicating results. CGI serves as a catalyst for action, but does not engage in the actual implementation of commitments.
https://www.clintonfoundation.org/clinton-global-initiative/about-us/commitments-action

An Update to CGI’s Online Commitments Directory

Since 2005, members of the CGI community have made thousands of Commitments to Action that are helping millions of people and are addressing some of the biggest challenges around the world. In the Commitments Department at CGI, we have the privilege to help them develop those commitments, share the lessons they’ve learned along the way, and highlight the story – whether on our stage, on our blog and social media platforms, or through coverage in the media.

As part of this effort, we regularly review our portfolio of more than 3,400 commitments and strive to make information about our member’s work available to the broader CGI and global development communities so that they, too, can benefit from our lessons learned.

While the vast majority of commitments – nearly 90% – have always been searchable online in our external database, some have not. In the early years of CGI, some members of our community asked that their commitments not be listed on our website and we honored that request; however, in the years since, and building upon our 2014 portfolio analysis, we’ve realized the great opportunities that come with sharing as much information as possible.

To encourage continuous learning for our members and to strengthen future Commitments to Action made through CGI, we will update our online search directory to reflect every commitment ever made.
https://www.clintonfoundation.org/blog/2016/04/29/update-cgis-online-commitments-directory

On the Commitments link at the CGI website you can read about specific initiatives, who is funding them, and what has been done. On the page for each project there is a short description of the project, then links to details and progress reports.

On the Commitments page there is also a search box that can be used to look for specific areas of interest. For instance if you search for "women" there are 1136 Commitments to Action and links to information about each of those commitments.

If you want solid information about the specifics of what is done the 2014 portfolio analysis linked in this article has a full analysis:

Learning from the CGI Commitment Portfolio

In the Commitments Department at the Clinton Global Initiative, we have the privilege of helping our members change the world for the better. Since 2005, CGI members have made more than 3,400 Commitments to Action — new, specific, and measurable plans that they implement to make a positive impact in our communities and around the world.

The Commitments staff at CGI helps to develop those commitments and share the lessons they’ve learned along the way. Building on our 2014 portfolio analysis, we’ve realized the great opportunities that come with sharing and analyzing our data to learn as much as we possibly can about what’s working, what isn’t, and what trends can be identified to inform our work, as well as to help guide practices for the broader social sector.

To date, the vast majority of CGI commitments have been successful or are ongoing in their efforts to make a positive impact around the world. This includes 1,570 (45%) that have been completed and 1,257 (36%) that are ongoing in their efforts to address critical efforts around climate change, increase opportunities for girls and women, alleviate poverty and spur economic development, and improve health and wellness worldwide. Because of the CGI community, more than 46 million children have access to a better education; more than 2.7 billion metric tons of CO2 were cut or abated; more than 11 million girls and women have been supported through empowerment initiatives; more than $313 million in research and development funds has been spent on new vaccines, medicines, and diagnostics; more than 27 million people have increased access to safe drinking water and sanitation — and so much more.
https://www.clintonfoundation.org/blog/2016/06/13/learning-cgi-commitment-portfolio

[pnwmom]

71. Thank you!

[csziggy]

72. What bugs me is that ALL the information about the Clinton Foundation

And the various groups that are under its umbrella is readily available on their web site. It doesn't even take any digging, just a few minutes to actually read the available data - and there is a LOT of data there!

I've looked at other organizations that claim to do charity/non-profit work and finding the facts about many is next to impossible. Over the last few days with the posts about the Clinton Foundation I went to their site for the first time ever and I now know much more about that non-profit than about any other I have ever researched.

It's so easy to find the answers to any question about the Clinton Foundation any reporter who claims there are problems with it are not doing their jobs - or are willfully misrepresenting the story.

[pnwmom]

73. I agree. They are as transparent as any Foundation out there. But most reporters either aren't

motivated or are too lazy to inform themselves.

[Cicada]

53. The annual can be waived and is waived for some groups

A nongovernmental organization, such as doctors without borders, or charitable organizations would have the fee waived. Governments or corporations or philanthropists would pay $20,000.

[Historic NY]

6. Frequently asked questions on membership...

https://www.clintonfoundation.org/clinton-global-initiative/membership/frequently-asked-questions

[MichiganVote]

2. K&R

[KMOD]

5. What Does Clinton Global Initiative Do, Exactly?

Forty-six million children have better educational opportunities, more than 110 million women and children have better access to health care, and clean drinking water is more available to over 27 million people.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/what-does-clinton-global-initiative-do_us_56095d6ee4b0af3706dce4e2

Thank you for this thread, pnwmom! So many people seem to be unaware of how wonderful this organization has been.

[MattP]

7. They provide grants to over 430 million people

[pnwmom]

8. The Global Initiative doesn't provide grants. Its members are individually involved in projects

across the world that help people and the environment.

[YvonneCa]

10. Thank you. CGI does a lot of good work...

...around the world . 🇺🇸

[pnwmom]

11. Its members do -- and the GI helps facilitate their work. n/t

[Hekate]

12. Thank you

Sadly, some people still have trouble with the concept

[pnwmom]

14. Few average voters would be expected to know about this. But members of the media

have a responsibility to get this right.

[Bill USA]

18. I think authentic, actual journalism is dead in the U.S. M$M. Mostly it's just infotainment ...and

of course, giving currency to any GOP disinformation and Big Lies...i.e. advertizing for the highest bidder.

[MohRokTah]

13. One of the lesser known things CGI has been doing is helping to stop the poaching of elephants. eom

[pnwmom]

15. Or, more precisely, that's what some of the members have been involved with.

Not the Global Initiative itself -- they are just a resource and a meeting-ground for the people doing the actual work.

[MohRokTah]

16. Precisely, but doing that provides big bang for the bucks

https://www.clintonfoundation.org/clinton-global-initiative/commitments/stop-poaching-trafficking-demand-ivory

[pnwmom]

20. Being connected with the GI draws more attention for these projects,

more financial and other support, as well as media interest.

[fun n serious]

17. It's basically networking for a fee...

and use of the name for your charity or cause. Is that what it is ? That is how I see it.

[pnwmom]

19. Yeah, it's a sort of networking club for leaders in all areas -- though fees can be waived

for leaders of non-profits, etc.

And they can use the GI name to promote their projects.

But what it is NOT is some kind of slush fund for funny money. It doesn't handle the money or the projects associated with it.

[fun n serious]

22. Right! I was outraged when CNN let Trump's man say 1 billion dollars went to Clinton..

It did NOT! I'm grateful people like you are here correcting this. Thank you.

[pnwmom]

24. Right -- the CNN story is what made me follow up. Before then I was vague on what the GI was.

But there is no excuse for CNN not to know!

The billion dollar pledge was for work one financier was committing to do in his country. The commitment was made at a GI conference, but no money went to the GI as a result of the pledge. Not a dime.

[fun n serious]

26. That was clear to me and it is such an outright lie

I was dissappointed CNN did not call him on it.

[Recursion]

27. It's a Linkedin for the Davos crowd

It's actually a kind of neat idea

[UtahLib]

28. Great information!

[ismnotwasm]

29. K&R

[anamandujano]

32. Useful information

Thank you.

[pnwmom]

33. You're welcome!

[PatSeg]

35. Thanks for the post

Very informative.

[pnwmom]

36. You're welcome. When the story came up that some Nigerian had made a pledge

to the Clinton Foundation for a billion dollars -- but other stories said he only gave 1-5 million over the years (combined) -- I got curious. It turned out that the billion was for a seawall project in Lagos, and wasn't going to the Global Initiative at all. None of the "commitments" are.

I wish the reporters had made the effort to understand basic facts.

[PatSeg]

37. They are too busy looking

for tabloid like headlines. Actual information isn't sexy enough.

[Armstead]

38. The elites hobnobbing with each otehr, and doling out happy talk to the public

A bunch of Fat Cats who are gaming the system, while telling the public how much they "care" about issues like poverty and inequality. And spouting off about nice concepts like micro loans to ameliorate the global damage their greed and lust for corporate power is causing. And a few NGO's and progressives along for window dressing.

It's the worst face of the "new global economy."

Personally I prefer aspects of the Clinton Foundation that just give money to groups to actually DO good things.

[pnwmom]

39. You can disparage it all you want, but the point remains that the money involved stays OUT of the

Clinton Foundation, except for the $20,000 membership fees (for those for whom the fee isn't waived).

It shouldn't be reported as if the sums are going to the Foundation.

[Armstead]

65. you are correct....except the Clintons should have built a huge moat between her....

and her staff and anything remotely having anything to do with the Foundation and anything to do with it while she was Sec. of State.

Even it is only for "appearances sake" it is yet more evidence of how closely tied together the Elites and Government are, and the whole notion of a pay-to-play network that exists at the highest levels.

[pnwmom]

68. Right. There should always be different and higher standards for Hillary than for anyone else.

Appearances should always be the bottom line if a woman aspires to be the first President.

[bettyellen]

62. How are "fat cats gaming the system" exactly? Links please.

[Armstead]

64. No need for links

The news oif the last 40 years provides ample evidence.

If you haven't realized it....Well the world is made of pink fluffy bunnies I guess.

[bettyellen]

67. So you just made up specific allegations and are ignorant about the non- profit world. Shocked.

[nolabear]

40. Thanks! Good breakdown and a smart concept.

I don't think people in general have the vaguest idea how non profit contributory networks work. Networking is key and it's encouraging that people have this conduit when they have money and desire but no idea how to use them.

[DFW]

43. About 11 years ago, I got the chance to ask Bill Clinton about the CGI

It's mostly about getting ideas and setting them up for implementation. They help with that,too. At least it was that way in 2005. Aside from funding, they're very interested in some outside candlepower. For example, he told me that an optometrist once approached him with the fact that hundreds of thousands of used pairs of glasses were thrown away every year in the west (or just in the USA, I forget). The eye-doc said he had been in India where the lower castes never had a chance at getting a pair of glasses ever, and even if the prescriptions weren't exact, they could distribute the used glasses in India to whomever could see better with what they had. Who the hell would have thought of that, or had the connections to put it in motion? Not me, anyway.

Clinton also said that while he was office, with third-world help projects, expenses ate up about 25% of the funds allocated for them. Now that he was out of office, he said his projects managed to accomplish the same work allocating only 4% of funds for expenses. When asked why that wasn't discovered while he was in office, he answered, "because we were stupid, that's why!" Not exactly the sort of response you'll ever hear from a Republican ex-office holder.

[amandabeech]

45. How does the CGI relate to the Clinton Foundation?

It is the Foundation that will be under investigation, not the CGI.

[pnwmom]

46. We don't know that anything "will be under investigation."

But in the last email kerfuffle, much was made about the fact that a certain member of the CGI had tried to leave a message for someone in the State Department. And it was said that this member had pledged a billion dollars to the CGI, implying that he had donated that amount to the CGI.

But the TRUTH is that none of that billion went to the CGI. That pledge was just an announcement of a billion dollar seawall project he was building in his own country. This is what members of CGI do. They network with each other, and share information about projects they're running independently -- outside of the CGI.

With regard to your question, the Clinton Foundation is mostly a charity that does charitable works. However, it includes within its umbrella the CGI, which holds conferences around the world, that are funded with $20K membership dues for those who can afford them.

[amandabeech]

49. The truth is that the FBI branch offices together with their local DOJ offices are starting

an investigation.

The effort is being led by the DOJ and FBI offices in Manhattan, and is probably being joined by the DOJ and FBI offices in DC and in Arkansas. The FBI office in DC will probably assist, but the DOJ in DC is out of the loop.

Look, this has been on the CNN website. If we're supposed to try to convince wavering voters that they should vote for Hillary, then we have to be able to counter stories that are out there. Ignoring them doesn't help one bit. Denial doesn't help as a response!

Here's the link. I saw Jake Tapper report on this just before the story went up on the website.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/11/politics/hillary-clinton-state-department-clinton-foundation/index.html

While I was looking for that story, I found something new. The FBI is releasing their notes from their interview of Hillary on July 2. If this is released to the public, it will probably be redacted.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/14/politics/congress-hillary-clinton-fbi-notes/index.html

Please explain this!

[pnwmom]

50. Link, please. The CNN story I read said the DOJ decided NOT to pursue an investigation.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/11/politics/hillary-clinton-state-department-clinton-foundation/index.html

Officials from the FBI and Department of Justice met several months ago to discuss opening a public corruption case into the Clinton Foundation, according to a US official.

At the time, three field offices were in agreement an investigation should be launched after the FBI received notification from a bank of suspicious activity from a foreigner who had donated to the Clinton Foundation, according to the official.

FBI officials wanted to investigate whether there was a criminal conflict of interest with the State Department and the Clinton Foundation during Clinton's tenure. The Department of Justice had looked into allegations surrounding the foundation a year earlier after the release of the controversial book "Clinton Cash," but found them to be unsubstantiated and there was insufficient evidence to open a case.


As a result, DOJ officials pushed back against opening a case during the meeting earlier this year. Some also expressed concern the request seemed more political than substantive, especially given the timing of it coinciding with the investigation into the private email server and Clinton's presidential campaign.

[amandabeech]

51. My updated post has the links. n/t

[pnwmom]

55. You just posted the same link I posted. And it doesn't say what you think it does.

Some FBI offices wanted to investigate, and the Justice Department "pushed back." This is NOT a confirmation of an ongoing investigation.


http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/11/politics/hillary-clinton-state-department-clinton-foundation/index.html

Officials from the FBI and Department of Justice met several months ago to discuss opening a public corruption case into the Clinton Foundation, according to a US official.

At the time, three field offices were in agreement an investigation should be launched after the FBI received notification from a bank of suspicious activity from a foreigner who had donated to the Clinton Foundation, according to the official.

FBI officials wanted to investigate whether there was a criminal conflict of interest with the State Department and the Clinton Foundation during Clinton's tenure. The Department of Justice had looked into allegations surrounding the foundation a year earlier after the release of the controversial book "Clinton Cash," but found them to be unsubstantiated and there was insufficient evidence to open a case.


As a result, DOJ officials pushed back against opening a case during the meeting earlier this year. Some also expressed concern the request seemed more political than substantive, especially given the timing of it coinciding with the investigation into the private email server and Clinton's presidential campaign.

[bettyellen]

59. The story does not say what you are claiming it does. RW rumour mongering.

[pnwmom]

60. OR you shouldn't believe everything you hear Paul Manafort say.

AND there's a good reason that what you thought you heard isn't in this written story, and it's not because of some Clinton/CNN conspiracy.

[pnwmom]

54. The link you posted said that the Justice Department "pushed back" on the request

since they had already looked into the allegations.

[pnwmom]

56. What is there possibly to explain about the Rethugs asking for the FBI to release their notes?

Of course they are. That's what they do -- use their power in Congress to try to make Hillary look bad.

[Maru Kitteh]

61. K & R and BOOKMARKED! Thanks for the thread :-)

[DesertRat]

63. k&r

[Exilednight]

66. As an employee of CGI, I would say that we are a tutoring program.

It's not just about networking. As an economist I am often sent to emerging markets to meet with finance ministers and the like. We identify key problems and offer up a variety of solutions.

There is a limit to what we can do. We can't force countries to employ our solutions, nor do we have every answer to every question, but that doesn't stop us from trying.

[pnwmom]

69. Thank you! I'm going to add a mention of your post to the OP if you don't mind.

This is valuable info.

[misterhighwasted]

77. Thank You.

What an honorable group you are part of.
Stronger Together Indeed.

[Andy823]

74. K&R nt

[pnwmom]

75. Thank you. I finally saw a reference to the Initiative in a news report

that mentioned, after reporting a project in the tens of millions, that none of the funds went to the Clinton Global Initiative itself. But most of the reports don't make that clear.

[HoneyBadger]

81. CGI has informed NYS that they are discontinuing operations