By Michelle Seiler-Tucker, Special for USDR
Before going into office as Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton promised the people more transparency. However, recent develops suggest that, that was not at the top of her agenda. First it was missing emails and the fact that Hilary’s correspondences encompassed sensitive government business over her private email account and the fact that she lacked a government issued one. Now there is criticism regarding where the Clinton Foundation, powered by her family, has been receiving its funding.
One of these companies that has been providing cash to the Clinton’s non-profit is a Moroccan government owned mining company called Office Cherifien des Phosphates (OCP). The problem is that this company has been criticized for human rights violations in the past. Media reports have varied, but all agree that the company is completely void of caring about people before its profits. While the purpose of all businesses is to ultimately make money, this company is supposedly capitalizing on impoverished people, and for removing resources from these impoverished lands without adequately compensating the poor who are already struggling to survive there.
The funding received by the globe-spanning charities of Hillary Clinton’s family from the foreign government has gone under intense investigations over the past weeks, while Mrs. Clinton continues to make moves towards becoming the Democratic nominee for the 2016 presidential race. So why would the Clinton’s risk the negative fall –out from accepting money from one of the world’s most controversial mining companies? Well, this could easily be in relation to another concern regarding the Federal Election Commission’s inability to properly track and regulate how political candidates are raising and receiving campaign funds.
About a week ago, the agency’s chairwoman, Ann M. Ravel, announced that the commission was at a stalemate regarding how to enforce and regulate political money funds raised for campaigns. There is proof elsewhere that rules have already been abused or flat-out ignored in anticipation of the 2016 presidential election. The biggest fraudulent activity actually is transpiring within non-profit organizations. There are cases where non-profits are improperly using their tax-exempt status for massive and well-financed political campaigns. Other guilty cases regarding misappropriation of funds include nonprofit companies such as, Crossroads GPS, which is accused of using their tax-exempt status for massive and well-financed political campaigns.
The Clinton Foundation’s acknowledgement means precise totals for government grants to the charity for the last three years of Clinton’s four-year tenure as secretary of state have still not been publicly disclosed. US charities are required to separately disclose how much they receive in government funding, both domestic and foreign. While experts in charity law have said the issues with the foundation’s public financial records are not evidence of deliberate wrongdoing, they do make it more difficult to grasp how the charities raise and spend their money (as seen in the case of Crossroads, GPS).