Judge Advances Clinton Foundation Whistleblower Case

(Congress Report) – It’s only been a few weeks since the release of special counsel John Durham’s final report into the origins of the Russian collusion hoax, which also exposed massive failures to properly investigate allegations made against twice-failed Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s family charity. A U.S. Tax Court judge has decided it’s time to reopen the years-long whistleblower case that features allegations of improprieties by the IRS involving the Clinton Foundation.

This woman’s fingerprints are all over a number of different scandals and somehow, despite all of the evidence stacked against her and the members of her family involved with the Clinton Foundation, she’s managed to escape accountability. We have a two-tiered system of justice and it is time to bring the sucker down, starting with Clinton.

John Solomon of Just the News wrote, “U.S. Tax Court Judge David Gustafson has already once before denied an IRS request to dismiss the whistleblower case, first brought in 2017. And three years ago, he ordered the tax agency to reveal whether it criminally investigated the foundation, citing a mysterious ‘gap’ in its records.”

“The IRS filed a new motion to dismiss, and all parties filed arguments over the last year. But on Monday, Gustafson postponed ruling on those motions, instead asking for new arguments in light of three recent precedent-setting court rulings, once again frustrating IRS efforts to make the case go away,” Solomon continued.

Three recent rulings in other tax cases could potentially impact the parties’ positions as to the pending motions, Gufstason said.

“We will order further filings so that the parties may address those recent opinions,” he added.

You can see the PDF files for the Clinton Foundation rulings here.

The judge then gave whistleblowers John Moynihan, who once served as a federal agent, along with Larry Doyle, a corporate tax compliance expert, until the end of June to update their arguments, as well as handing a July 28 deadline for the IRS to issue a response. This is a pretty solid indication that the case involving the Clintons will continue for many months into the future.

The judge also pointed out that the IRS has yet to respond to a request made about updating the court record with new evidence.

Solomon noted, “Monday’s ruling adds new intrigue in a case that first surfaced nearly five years ago when Doyle and Moynihan, two respected forensic financial investigators, revealed the existence of their 2017 IRS whistleblower complaint against the foundation during a congressional hearing.”

“Moynihan and Doyle testified to a House committee in December 2018 that they believed the foundation wrongly operated as a foreign lobbyist by accepting overseas donations, then trying to influence U.S. policy,” the report stated.

At the time, Moynihan’s testimony brought to light that the foundation “began acting as an agent of foreign governments early in its life and throughout its existence.”

“As such, the foundation should’ve registered under FARA (Foreign Agents Registration Act). Ultimately, the foundation and its auditors conceded in formal submissions that it did operate as a (foreign) agent, therefore the foundation is not entitled to its 501c3 tax-exempt privileges as outlined in IRS 170 (c)2,” he explained.

The Clinton Foundation has admitted that past internal audits of the organization revealed there were compliance issues with some of the charity’s practices, but has maintained that all of the problems have now been addressed, stating it has always been obedient to the law and denying the allegations made by the whistleblower.

“In October 2020, Gustafson first allowed the whistleblower case to proceed, rejecting an IRS motion for summary judgement. He cited nonpublic evidence the FBI and IRS may have worked jointly on a criminal investigation focused on the foundation. Months later, the judge suggested the IRS whistleblower office may have evidence it had not disclosed to the court in the case,” Just the News penned.

“There are facts and information, uniquely within the knowledge of the Whistleblower Office that need to be considered in connection with the resolution of the petitioner’s claim,” he wrote in May 2021,” he continued.

Some of the evidence in question came to light after the public release of Durham’s 306-page report that divulged the FBI had a total of four different ongoing investigations into Bill and Hillary Clinton’s business and charitable activities. Three of the investigations were launched during the 2016 presidential election and focused on accusations that the Clinton Foundation was participating in “criminal activity,” which included “fraud and corruption allegations.”

One of the more serious allegations made against the Clintons was that a corporate industry “likely engaged a federal public official in a flow of benefits scheme, namely, large monetary contributions were made to a non-profit, under both direct and indirect control of the federal public official, in exchange for favorable government action and/or influence,” Durham explained.

“Beginning in late 2014, before Clinton formally declared her presidential candidacy, the FBI learned from a well-placed [source] that a foreign government was planning to send an individual to contribute to Clinton’s anticipated presidential campaign, as a way to gain influence with her should she win the presidency,” the special counsel added.

As the 2016 presidential election drew to a close, all four of these probes were shut down. Several senior FBI and DOJ officials then got involved in efforts to impede or completely stop the investigations, according to Durham, who discovered and collected evidence from FBI agents who were cooperative with his own investigation.

“Both senior FBI and department officials placed restrictions on how those matters were to be handled such that essentially no investigative activities occurred for months,” he pointed out.

The new request from Judge Gustafson provides both Moynihan and Doyle with an opportunity to include the freshly discovered evidence and allegations made by Durham in his report over the course of the next month.

Copyright 2023. CongressReport.com