When consulting firm Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, better known simply as Simpson Thacher, completed its corporate review of the Clinton Foundation earlier this month, their conclusions were picked up by the New York Times. Authors Nicholas Confessore and Amy Chozick gently chided the Clintons for running a money machine allegedly designed to “strengthen the capacity of people throughout the world to meet the challenges of global interdependence” but which suffers instead from poor financial management and conflicts of interest. Nowhere in either that report or in the Times’ rendition of it was any direct mention of its new real purpose: to provide a launching pad for Hillary’s (shown) insatiable and unquenchable desire to be the next president of the United States.
Based on nearly 40 interviews with staff members of the foundation over a two-week period in November 2011, Simpson Thacher made some modest recommendations: Expand the board of directors, hire someone who can work full time at running the place, and keep an eye on potential conflicts of interest. It recommended raising an endowment fund large enough to meet its operating expenses independent of Bill Clinton’s ability (he had open heart surgeries in 2004, 2005, and 2010) to give enough speeches, often at $500,000 a pop, to keep the place running. It noted that for an operation that generates hundreds of millions in revenues ($214 million in 2012 alone), Simpson Thacher couldn't explain how it could possibly lose money, but it did, running a deficit of $40 million in 2010 and 2011 and losing another $8 million last year.
The authors noted that from its beginning in 2001 the foundation has been run by, and has handsomely profited, an entire playbill of Clinton cronies and supporters, including Doug Band, who created the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI); six-figure donor John Catsimatidis; Ira Magaziner, the architect of Hillary’s failed “Hillarycare” legislation; and Bruce Lindsey, current CEO of the foundation.
Click here to read the entire article.