Today marks 60 days since I returned from Australia with a cache of more than 15,000 new documents in The AWU Scandal.
That was the last time I asked for your help to keep on keeping on.
I published this piece back then.
I stand by it.
The volume of material I now have to work through - and its importance in getting to the whole truth does mean a delay to my schedule in the private prosecution of GILLARD.
I'd planned to file charges against her in October, but given the new material it'd be unwise to file what would be incomplete information. I'll revise my schedule and let you know the plan as soon as it's clear to me.
In the meantime I'm grateful to you for your continued support for our activities here. We've had a spike in expenses with a trip to Perth for a week - but what a trip and what a great result from it!
National Australia Bank
Acct No: 537650476
We’ve been investigating The AWU Scandal here for more than 5 years.
During those 250 weeks we’ve unearthed a colossal collection of evidence.
Seven days ago I’d have said we’ve come pretty close to telling the whole sordid story.
And I’d have been wrong.
The new material I’ve acquired this week is an order of magnitude greater in volume and importance than the total of all our work to date.
I will publish some of it here for the first time.
But much of it is so important to Australia’s history that I think it warrants more prominence and gravitas than we offer.
Complex important stories like this one deserve the weight of a national journal of record and I’ll do my best to make sure this story gets just that.
Thank you for your company while we’ve been working to get the truth.
It’s been a long time coming.
Now that I know what that truth is - I can say with certainty it’s been worth it.
Labor senator Sam Dastyari warned wealthy Chinese donor Huang Xiangmo his phone was bugged
Labor senator Sam Dastyari warned Chinese Communist Party-linked political donor Huang Xiangmo last year that his phone was likely tapped by government agencies, including the US government.
Before the two spoke, Mr Dastyari gave Mr Huang counter-surveillance advice, saying they should leave their phones inside and go outside to speak.
The face-to-face meeting between the pair in the grounds of Mr Huang's Mosman mansion in Sydney last October came several weeks after Mr Dastyari quit the frontbench over his dealings with Mr Huang.
It also occurred after ASIO briefed senior political figures, including from the Australian Labor Party, that Mr Huang was of interest to the agency over his opaque links to the Chinese government.
Security agencies have the capacity to use mobile phones as surveillance devices without a user's knowledge.
A Canberra source with knowledge of the meeting said on background that Mr Dastyari blamed the US government for the scandal that earlier enveloped him and Mr Huang and said he was the subject of surveillance, including by the US government.
Details of the phone tap warning and other dealings involving the pair have been collected by national security officials, Fairfax Media has confirmed, and the revelations are likely to spark debate about sweeping reforms proposed by the Turnbull government to counter foreign interference in Australia.Attorney-General George Brandis said the revelation raised questions about Mr Dastyari's loyalty.
"This comes at a time when members and senators are under intense scrutiny over whether they hold dual citizenship. Of the 226 Australians elected at the 2016 federal election, the person whose allegiance to Australia is most in question is Sam Dastyari," Mr Brandis said.
The Mosman meeting occurred more than a month after media reports in early September last year that ASIO's top spy, Duncan Lewis, had warned Labor "that some of their donors had strong links to the Chinese Government".
Those same media reports also detailed dealings between Mr Dastyari and Mr Huang. Among them were that Mr Huang had paid a $5000 legal bill for Mr Dastyari, and that Mr Huang had told a Chinese Communist Party newspaper that "political demands and political donations" should be linked.
Also among the revelations that damaged Mr Dastyari were comments he reportedly made at a press conference with Mr Huang that contradicted Labor policy on the South China Sea, and echoed Beijing's policy position.
These events led to Mr Dastyari's resignation from the Labor frontbench on September 7 last year.
Two Labor sources have also confirmed that, shortly after these events, Opposition Leader Bill Shorten warned Mr Dastyari through a "back channel" that ASIO had concerns about Mr Huang. Mr Shorten's office declined to answer questions about if or when this occurred, although a source with first-hand knowledge of the ASIO warning relayed to Mr Dastyari said it was generic and did not contain any classified information known to Mr Shorten.
On Monday, Fairfax Media asked Mr Dastyari why he had told Mr Huang his phone was tapped, and why he advised him to move outside his house and not to speak near his phone.
Mr Dastyari responded: "I reject any assertion that I did anything other than put to Mr Huang gossip being spread by journalists."
Fairfax Media also asked Mr Dastyari why he met Mr Huang in person, rather than calling him, and why he thought a face-to-face meeting was appropriate weeks after the extensive public reporting about ASIO's concerns regarding Chinese Communist Party-connected donors.
Mr Dastyari said: "After the events of last year, I spoke to Mr Huang to tell him that I did not think it was appropriate that we have future contact. I thought it was a matter of common courtesy to say this face to face."
Mr Dastyari has since begun his public rehabilitation, and was promoted to deputy senate whip in February.
Mr Dastyari said on Monday: "I have never received a security agency briefing, or received any classified information about any matter, ever. I've never passed on any protected information – I've never been in possession of any."
His statement did not address what fellow Labor officials had told him about Mr Huang.
Mr Huang, a billionaire property developer, has close ties to the Chinese consulate in Sydney and, until the weekend, headed a Sydney organisation aligned with the Chinese Communist Party's political lobbying and propaganda agency, the United Front Work Department.
On Saturday, Mr Huang stepped down as chairman of the Australian Council for the Promotion of the Peaceful Reunification of China (ACPPRC), and was lauded as a "banner" and likened to a patriotic flag who had made "heroic achievements" in the past year.
On September 14, 2016, weeks prior to the Mosman meeting, US ambassador John Berry said the US was concerned about Chinese government involvement in Australian politics, in remarks reported in connection to Mr Dastyari's dealings with Mr Huang.
On September 28, also prior to the meeting, Mr Huang dispatched members of the ACPPRC for a meeting in Beijing with a senior Chinese government official, who directed the members to "make allies to obtain international support" and contribute to the "great revitalisation of the Chinese nation".
ASIO began an assessment of Mr Huang's citizenship application in early 2016. The application remains blocked by ASIO and, earlier this year, national security officials interviewed Mr Huang at a secure Sydney CBD location.
Fairfax Media and Four Corners have previously revealed that after the citizenship request first stalled in early 2016, Mr Huang asked Mr Dastyari to intervene on his behalf. Mr Dastyari or his office called immigration officials four times in the first six months of 2016, but the senator has described this contact as routine.
The Turnbull government is planning to introduce news laws this year to counter foreign interference from Beijing and other nations and require agents or official advocates of foreign governments to register under a foreign agents registration act. The latter reform may concern ex-senior Liberal and Labor figures who work for companies or institutions controlled or directed by Beijing or its proxies.
A former intelligence officer told Fairfax Media that the instruction to Mr Huang to talk not within the vicinity of his phone amounts to counter-surveillance advice. Mr Dastyari is a security-conscious member of federal parliament who, along with many colleagues, uses encrypted applications to communicate.
On 5 December, 1994 Stephen Conroy was announced as the replacement Senator for Gareth Evans after Evans moved to the lower house.
The seat was retained by the Labor Unity faction, of which Mr Conroy is Victorian secretary.
Mr Conroy works for the Transport Workers Union, but moved to Melbourne from Canberra in 1987 to work for Senator Ray.
At yesterday's meeting of the public office selection committee, which completed preselections for the next election, Mr Conroy scored 88 votes over the non-aligned Mr David McKenzie and Mr John Zigouras.
Senator Ray and Senator Barney Cooney will head the ALP's Senate ticket and, as expected, the union leader Ms Jennie George won the third spot.
By factional agreement the third place was delegated to the Socialist Left, whose other candidates, Ms Julia Gillard and Mr Ted Murphy, withdrew their nominations yesterday morning.
On 18 May, 1995 Jennie George withdrew her nomination and a "large number" of aspirants were expected to compete for the position.
A former teachers' union official and the first woman elected to the ACTU executive, Ms George was preselected for the Senate ticket late last year.
This came in the wake of the ALP's historic decision to set affirmative action quotas for its parliamentary preselections.
In her statement, Ms George cited the ``significant challenge" faced by the union movement to turn around its declining membership as a reason for staying at the ACTU.
She also made clear her expectation that she would be replaced on the Senate ticket by a woman.
``I feel confident that there are many capable women who can replace me on the Senate team and that, in light of the circumstances outlined, the most effective contribution I can make on behalf of working people is not to leave the ACTU at this stage," she said.
A large number of aspirants are expected to nominate to take Ms George's place, including Ms Julia Gillard, who is a lawyer with the firm, Slater and Gordon.
On 30 June, 1995 The Age noted that Julia Gillard had formally nominated for the Socialist Left's endorsement to take Ms George's No 3 Senate ticket position.
On 27 July, 1995 The Age reported on turmoil in the Victorian Labor Left after machinations to install Martin Ferguson as the pre-selected Labor Candidate for Batman.
Lawyer John Zigouras had finished 4th (after Jennie George) for the Labor Senate ticket and he felt he should move up to take the No 3 position. Julia Gillard argued that because Jennie George was from the Socialist Left, she should replace her. The issue was unresolved.
Some faction figures in Victoria, supportive of Mr Ferguson, are wary of the possibilty of national intervention as a precedent in Victoria because of a likely appeal against a preselection decision by a defeated Victorian Senate nominee, Mr John Zigouras.
Mr Zigouras is likely to push for national executive intervention to overturn a decision to reopen preselection after the withdrawal of the ACTU assistant secretary, Ms Jennie George, from the third place on the ticket for the next poll.
A Melbourne lawyer, Ms Julia Gillard, was nominated by the Socialist Left faction to replace her, but Mr Zigouras, who finished fourth in the first vote, believes he should take her place because the vote was taken on the basis of proportional representation.
Mr Zigouras, an industrial lawyer who claims to be factionally non- aligned, has some backing in the union movement for his claim.
He said yesterday he hoped his case could be settled internally but he is believed to be willing to take it to the national executive, with Mr Ferguson's case as a possible precedent if there is intervention on his behalf.
What we've not known until recently is the extent of financial dealings between Mr Zigouras's interests, the AWU, Wilson and Gillard.
A good friend of this website told us overnight:
Yes I recall Zigouras and Debbie (Lawn) who worked in his law firm. In short Ziggy (as he is known) is a hard left winger out of the same labor left as Gillard. I knew him but never liked him.
Debbie had a relationship with Bill the Greek but he left her and took off back to Greece when the scandal became public.
When the Greek was in a relationship with Debbie she had 24/7 use of a union car. Wilson would have had to approve that! Debbie worked from Ziggies Mildura office and I have personally seen the car parked at her office many times as I travelled across the state electioneering back then for AWU elections and was in Mildura 2/3 days a fortnight.
I laughed where Ziggy is referred to as not aligned with ALP factions. Ziggy, the ETU and a handful of other lefties broke away from the mainstream left and formed their own faction, from memory they called themselves the 'pledge' faction (self serving hard left). They had considerable power back then because they negotiated with Conroy and Shorten independently from the traditional left led by Kim Carr. The most inflentual union in the group was the new ETU with its secretary Dean Mighel.
In April 1995 Wilson closed the AWU Workplace Reform Association bank accounts.
Money was becoming tight as new management moved into the AWU WA and Victorian branches - and Wilson et al progressively moved to the National Construction Branch roles. In many ways, the gig was up.
On 15 May 1995 Wayne Hem banked a cheque from Debbie Lawn - for $10,000 - into Bill the Greek's CBA account.
Ms Lawn continued to work for Mr Zigouras's law firm.
That money found its way into Gillard's renovations.
Here's Wilson's cheque made out to Gillard's builder - note the distinctive non-Wilson handwriting, the cheque was written out by Bill Telikostiglou.
Here's the statement showing the cheque was presented on 5 June, 1995 and was met on presentation.
Nine entries above cheque 181 for $2,180 in the statement is a 17 May 1995 deposit of $2,000.00.
The deposit slip is also in Wayne Hem's handwriting - and where'd the money come from?
Telikostiglou's cheque for $2,000
screen grab from his CBA statement showing where the $2K came from - a $10K deposit 3 days earlier
details of the $10,000 cheque which came from the phantom AWU employee Ms Debbie Lawn.
On 28 June Ms Lawn appeared on the list of AWU employees paid from the AWU's CBA account.
Note that the pays above Ms Lawn's entry total around $5K.
Here's GILLARD in her 11 September 1995 exit interview with Peter GORDON and Geoff SHAW.
I can't categorically rule out that something at my house didn't get paid for by the association or something at my house didn't get paid for by the union or whatever, I just, I don't feel confident saying I can categorically rule it out
Bernard Murphy was emphatic in what he told the Royal Commission - the concern was that the AWU itself had been the source of funds for Gillard's renovations.
Q. The second matter to which you make reference in paragraph 3.4 is rumours circulating that some of Ms Gillard's home renovations had been paid for by the AWU.
Who told you about those rumours?
A. Well, I recall being told of one incident by Andrew Watson who was a former barrister who had become an industrial officer of another union. He told me about a builder turning up at the AWU and asking for payment and I told Julia about that, but that wasn't the only occasion to which I'm referring. There were wider rumours. I can't recall their source at the time, but it wasn't - they were being discussed more widely than that. It wasn't that much longer before Phillip Gude raised them in State Parliament.
Q. Were they being discussed among the partnership at Slater & Gordon?
A. I don't know. I wasn't attending partners' meetings at the time because of the Harris Smith dispute, but I must say I presume they were because they were raised with Gillard in the interview that was transcribed.
Q. Was it a matter that Nick Styant-Browne raised with you?
Q. Just pausing at the top of page 3, the last part of 3.4, you say some of Julia Gillard's home renovations had been paid for by the AWU. Did you hear rumours to the effect that funds had come from the incorporated association to pay for those renovations?
Police have released what is believed to be the first footage of a ‘relay crime’ in the West Midlands that allows thieves to drive off in vehicles without needing to even see the owner’s keys
The video shows two men pulling up outside the victim’s house, both carrying relay boxes. The devices are capable of receiving signals through walls, doors and windows, but not metal.
In the footage, one of the men can be seen waving a relay box in front of the property.
The box receives a signal from the key inside and transmits it to the second box next to the car.
The car’s systems are then tricked into thinking that the key is present and so it is unlocked.
The thieves then drive off, with the whole crime taking just one minute.
The Mercedes has not been recovered following the theft, which happened in the Elmdon area of Solihull overnight on 24 September.
Mark Silvester, from the West Midlands Police crime reduction team, said: "To protect against this type of theft, owners can use an additional tested and Thatcham-approved steering lock to cover the entire steering wheel.
"We also recommend Thatcham-approved tracking solutions fitted to the vehicle.
"It is always worth speaking to your main dealer, to ensure that your car has had all the latest software updates and talk through security concerns with them."
Sgt Tim Evans, from Solihull Police, said: “It’s important the public are reassured that we are taking proactive steps to tackle this type of crime in Solihull.
“We hope that knowledge of this type of crime will enable members of the public to take simple steps to secure their vehicle and assist us."
Anyone with information on the Elmdon theft should call police on 101, quoting crime reference number 20SH/204842W/17.
I have asked several Senators to cause our Senate to use its powers to order an Enquiry into the "pay to play" allegations concerning the Clinton Foundation and the Australian Government's donations to it.
Here is some of my submission.
Senate Enquiry into “Pay to Play” donations from the Australian Government to the Clinton Presidential Library
Since 2006, the Australian Government has donated around $100 million directly to the Clinton Foundation, one of America's 13 Presidential Libraries.
The 13 libraries were established and are operated under the following US legislation:
Presidential Records Act of 1978 The Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978 governs the official records of Presidents and Vice Presidents created or received after January 20, 1981.
Presidential Libraries Act of 1986 The Presidential Libraries Act of 1986 made significant changes to Presidential Libraries, requiring private endowments linked to the size of the facility.
Executive Order 12958 Signed by President Clinton on April 17, 1995, Executive Order 12958 mandates a review of classified documents older than 25 years. Executive Order 12958 was amended by Executive Order 13292 on March 25, 2003.
Controversially, about 5 or 6 years into the Clinton Foundation's life, the directors of the Clinton Presidential Library began to exploit the privileges and to interpret the provisions which apply to all Presidential Libraries so broadly that the original purpose of the foundation has been obscured.
The Clinton Foundation was founded 3 years before Clinton left the White House by 3 citizens of the former President's home state Arkansas. Its statement of purpose and the approvals for it to operate as a charitable tax exempt foundation were the same as the 12 other Foundations established under the Presidential Libraries Act.
During his presidency Clinton famously debated the meaning of the word "is".
He continues his presidential tradition of semantic debates with the Clinton Foundation's unique interpretation of what operating a "Presidential Archival Depository" means.
Initially the Clinton Foundation "honoured the legacy" of the Clinton Presidency.
Clinton extended the meaning of honouring the legacy into continuing the "work" of his Presidency.
By the time Clinton started soliciting donations from Australian taxpayers, honouring the Clinton Legacy included a range of dubious activities with suspect partners around the world - including lobbying foreign governments to assist Clinton Foundation donors to buy uranium mines and other continuations of the Clinton Presidential code of personal conduct.
The Clinton Foundation is continuing the "work" of Clinton's presidency in ways that reflect the worst excesses of his time in office.
On 24 January 2001 the Washington Post delivered this lead editorial as the Clintons moved out of the White House, taking with them a substantial inventory of household goods including $190,000 of home furnishings solicited as gifts to order.
Count the Spoons
The list makes it sound as if the Clintons registered for wedding gifts: some $22,000 worth of china, including several gifts of about $5,000 each; about $18,000 for flatware, some in similar increments; $19,900 for two sofas, an easy chair and an ottoman; $3,650 for a kitchen table and four chairs; $2,993 for "televisions and DVD player." Denise Rich of New York, also a significant campaign contributor whose fugitive former husband Mr. Clinton pardoned in the final hours of his presidency, provided two coffee tables and two chairs valued at $7,375.
The list demonstrates again the Clintons' defining characteristic: They have no capacity for embarrassment. Words like shabby and tawdry come to mind. They don't begin to do it justice.
In addition to its $100M in direct donations, the Australian Government has paid more than $100 million for the purchase of pharmaceuticals from companies that have suspect financial arrangements with the Clinton Foundation.
Australian aid money was spent buying drugs from the Indian manufacturer Ranbaxy during the time when Ranbaxy was selling adulterated and worthless tablets that killed people.
Several shady Indian businessmen were made into wealthy shady Indian businessmen through Clinton's arrangements exploiting the removal of patents and other trade protections from expensive brand name drugs for delivery to patients in designated developing countries. While Clinton claims credit for "negotiating" reduced price lists for HIV/Aids drugs, the lower prices for HIV/Aids medicines were the result of World Trade Organisation negotiations and lobbying of many governments, notably George Bush's for the removal of patents protections and other competitive restraints on the importation of brand name pharmaceuticals into developing countries.
It is not clear why the Clinton Foundation has received so much Australian taxpayer funding when the legislation under which it is established precludes its own federal government from funding it.
Nor is it at all clear why Australian taxpayers should donate $100M to "honour the legacy and continue the work of the Clinton Presidency" when we have provided no money to honour the legacies held at these foundations;
The exposition of emails in former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email server show the Clinton Foundation's role as receiver for the "pay to play" solicitation of tax-deductible bribes now developing in the United States.
Emails released just this past week by Judicial Watch include this intercession by "wjc" through his staff to his wife the Secretary of State, seeking special treatment for a significant donor to the Clinton Foundation.
A July 27, 2009, exchange of emails begins with Abedin advising Clinton scheduler Lona Valmoro that “wjc” (William Jefferson Clinton) wants special treatment for high-dollar Foundation donor and Dow Chemical’s CEO Andrew Liveris. Dow donated between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, making it one of the largest corporate donors in Foundation history.
Paul, Andrew Leveris, CEO of Dow Chemical, is going to be at the dinner tomorrow night. We would like HRC to see him, perhaps they can do a brief pull aside upon arrival. Huma, would that work for you?
Lona, I have arranged this pull aside for on the arrival in the Hold Room across the hall from the ballroom, immediately prior to the Secretary’s entrance and remarks.
More than 50% of Secretary of State Clinton's meetings with parties from outside the United States Government took place only after the party had donated a significant sum of money to the Clinton Foundation.
Former Australian Prime Ministers Rudd and Gillard were featured participants in New York at the annual Clinton Global Initiative. Bill Clinton introduced Rudd as one of "the smartest, most well read and intelligent leaders in the world today" to the crowd of global leaders in town for the UN leaders week around which the CGI is based.
In March 2008 Rudd was recorded whispering "let me know if there's anything we can do to help" to a fundraising Hillary Clinton in presidential campaigning mode.
One week before the September 2008 Clinton Global Initiative, Rudd announced an unbudgeted $400M white elephant called the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute.
When Rudd appeared at the CGI that year he signed an MOU between the Australian Government and Clinton declaring a partnership with the Clinton Foundation Climate Initiative and the yet to be incorporated Global Carbon Capture Institute. The Commonwealth donated $10M to Clinton before December 2008 and that donation was "novated" from the books of the Commonwealth to the off-balance-sheet GCCI after its incorporation. Unfortunately for Mr Rudd, the Clinton Foundation reported the Australian Government as donor.
Hillary Clinton was Gillard's personal tour guide and interlocked fingers hand-holder during her 2012 CGI week of appointments in New York, paving the way for Gillard's post-retirement sinecures.
Clinton had 3 months left to exploit the pay to play cash generated during her term as US Secretary of State and her price was at its peak. 3 days before Gillard left for the CGI, Greg Combet announced the deal under which the Clinton Foundation would be paid $14M for work he'd already been paid for by the Rockefeller Foundation using systems, software and expensive purpose built platforms paid for by the Australian Government.
Australians are entitled to know where their money went, who sent it, what it was used for and why the Clinton Library is worthy of our donations.
The history of the unique US Presidential Library system
Short of death, a mid-term electoral disaster or impeachment, America’s heads of state lead the nation for eight years.
America has no castles nor formal dynastic succession with ancestral homes displaying collections through the ages.
America's Presidential Libraries are intended to be symbols of the country's egalitarian values and its government by for and of the people.
Without a hereditary monarchy, it’s America’s Presidents who mark out the chapters of America’s history as it happens. Presidents are tied to the big things like the December ‘41 date that will live in infamy, the 11th of September terror attacks and all the way with LBJ to war in Vietnam. President Kennedy inspired mankind’s giant leap to the moon and when Walter Cronkite announced that he “died today at 1PM” history froze for millions who’d remember tiny details about that moment in time for the rest of their lives.
Like the layers of rock that hold earth’s history, each American President’s time in office captures unique insights into a chunk of the nation’s timeline.
It was President Roosevelt who first noted the amount of priceless historical material his time in The White House produced.
Roosevelt felt that Presidential papers are an important part of the national heritage and should be accessible to the public. He sought out expert historians, librarians, archivists and curators to help create an institution to house and display the artefacts of his time.
On 10 December 1938 a non-profit entity was incorporated with a charter to raise money for the construction of the Roosevelt Presidential Library to be built on Roosevelt’s Hyde Park estate.
An admirable element of the evolution of this program is the mandating of a private foundation raising private donations to build and fund the operations of each library. That important consideration means no politician should be able to direct funds to the personal aggrandising of a politicial fellow traveller or himself.
No US taxpayer funding has been provided for any Presidential Library. In every case, community-minded citizens have come together to create a not-for profit charitable foundation to raise the money to construct and operate the Library.
After the Roosevelt foundation's success, Harry S. Truman decided in 1950 that he, too, would build a library to house his Presidential papers. In 1955, Congress passed the Presidential Libraries Act, establishing a system of privately erected and federally maintained libraries. The Act encouraged other Presidents to donate their historical materials to the government and ensured the preservation of Presidential papers and their availability to the American people.
Under this and subsequent acts, more libraries have been established. In each case, donations were raised by a non-profit charitable foundation specifically established to fund the library. Once completed, the private organization turned over the libraries to the National Archives and Records Administration to operate and maintain.
Until 1978, Presidents, scholars, and legal professionals held the view dating back to George Washington that the records created by the President or his staff while in office remained the personal property of the President and were his to take with him when he left office. The first Presidential libraries were built on this concept.
The Presidential Records Act of 1978 established that the Presidential records that document the constitutional, statutory, and ceremonial duties of the President are the property of the United States Government. The Act provided for the continuation of Presidential libraries as the repository for Presidential records.
The Presidential Libraries Act of 1986 also made significant changes to Presidential libraries, requiring private endowments linked to the size of the facility. The US national archives uses these endowments to offset a portion of the maintenance costs for the library.
President Reagan’s Presidential Library is huge. It houses the actual Air Force One aeroplane from Reagan’s time in office
President Ronald Reagan often spoke of America as a “shining city on a hill,” and the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library perched on top of a hill in California seems like a realization of that vision. The Reagan Library complex, with its huge expansion to house a decommissioned Air Force One, is by far the largest presidential library. At 240,000 square feet it is 90,000 square feet larger than the runner-up, the William J. Clinton Library in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Reagen's may be the most extensive foundation physically. But no presidential foundation comes close to the spread of tax exempt business operations established by the Clinton Foundation to raise and spend incredible amounts of money used to fund the continuing Presidential Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous Clinton Family.
The physical building is but a small part of "continuing the work" of the Clinton Foundation's operations. The opacity of its financial accounts make it difficult to match donations given to revenues reported, however it's easy to see the links to donations and the timing of meetings or other favourable decisions for donors.
In most jurisdictions, bribery or the solicitation or offering of a secret commission is illegal.
Establishing a scheme where a bribe or secret commission is a tax deductible donation would be likely to engage the interest of most national regulators.
It appears that it's possible for a country like Australia to engage the Clinton Foundation on an ostensible fee for service basis for a large and usually round number.
In return for the fee for service, the Clinton Foundation delivers a few photographs representing its shovel ready dealings in a 3rd world jurisdiction in return for the large round number from the funder, regularly that's Australia.
The potential for favours to accrue to the political approvers behind the transfer of taxpayer funds to the Clintons is an obvious invitation to malfeasance.
It may all be innocent. It may be that Australian politicians are uniquely naive to the possibility a global celebrity like Bill Clinton might have in his past indicators of dishonesty or an intention to deceive. There may be other more sinister explanations for the Australian Government to cause more meaningful inquiries into the obvious concerns swirling around the Clintons and our money.
Putting to one side the motivations, the facts about our money aren't in dispute. We sent it, the Clintons spent it.
$100M donated to the cause of consecrating a Clinton shrine is a very big taxpayer investment. Perhaps it's time it was delved more deeply into.
February 22 2006 - The Australian Government signs a $25M Memorandum of Understanding with Bill Clinton
Here are former Foreign Minister Alexander Downer and current Foreign Minister Julie Bishop signing the first MOU with Clinton and the second MOU expunging some of the uncomfortable recitals of the first.
This paper provides a summary of more detailed analysis of the $25M donation Clinton solicited from the Australian Government which can be found here.
During the period under my review, the Clinton Foundation's "audited" financial reports showed that it maintained bank accounts in Asia, South America and Africa. Papua New Guinea was the most significant area of Australian taxpayer funded operations under the $25M MOU (PNG operations received $15M).
Under PNG law the lowest level of oversight for an incorporated entity applies to incorporated associations. The structure is typically offered to groups of altruistic citizens who can prove their members are jointly engaged in pursuits like children's washing children's football guernseys, judo, ladies lawn bowling or the creation of patchwork quilts and complex knitted garments. Laundering money through a patchwork of complex international transfers is an unusual reason for the regulator to allow incorporation, because as well as the low level of financial activity expected of an incorporated association, there is no requirement for it to lodge a financial return of any type to anyone. Ever.
The Clinton Foundation reported spectacular growth in its offshore (ie offshore from its home jurisdiction, the USA) accounts after funds commenced to flow following the incorporation of its clinton foundation association with the tea-club level of scrutiny in 2006. These amounts are drawn from a series of Clinton Foundation financial accounts filed at its early website.
The money held in those offshore accounts was not transferred from the Clinton Foundation's US entity. It was deposited and the accounts were operated in countries which share the dubious distinction of joint appearances near the bottom of the Transparency International corruption index. In many of these countries it's not unknown for regulators to eschew diligent law enforcement for financial friends.
The amounts above are what the Clinton Foundation reported as year end balances. Who knows what transactions took place or what bagman tours of the third world were conducted in between.
More details about the Clinton Foundation's offshore bank accounts and the specific countries are filed with the IRS, here's a screenshot of the 2005 jurisdictions.
The US IRS appears to take little interest in the incorporation of associations in PNG and their bank accounts. So Australians would hope their government's level of oversight of the Australian millions donated to the Clintons in PNG was closely examined for probity breach potential.
Unfortunately, the Australian Government seems to share the IRS disinterest. Our government routinely reports on its payments to the Clinton Foundation in a manner that discloses poor due diligence and lack of understanding about the donations the Foundation solicits.
The Clinton Foundation was a single legal entity during the period of our 22 February MOU funding 2006-2009. The MOU is imprecise as to the Clinton entities covered by the agreement, the Clinton Foundation appears in the headings and recitals, while Clinton (then a disbarred lawyer and not a fiduciary or authorised representative of either entity) signed for the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative Inc.
The Clinton Foundation HIV/Aids Initiative Inc (CHAI) was a separately incorporated non-profit corporation which existed until dissolved by regulators for breaches of financial reporting legislation effective 31 December 2007.
The Clinton Foundation claim that the CHAI was merged into the Clinton Foundation on 31 December 2005 is false. A merger of two non-profit corporations requires the non-surviving entity to be dissolved, while some assets moved between the entities, the CHAI Inc maintained its registration as a separate trading entity and its directors remained as officers of the entity until its dissolution.
On 8 March 2015 Australia's DFAT sent me a statement in response to queries I made about Australian donations solicited by Clinton.
The statement reads:
“Former US President Bill Clinton signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Australian Government in 2006 in his capacity as the Founder and Representative of the William J Clinton Foundation. The MOU is a non-binding cooperation agreement with the intent to fight HIV/AIDS in China, Vietnam and Papua New Guinea. All funding arrangements are accompanied by specific legal funding agreements with specified outcomes, deliverables, budgets and conditions. No donations were provided to the Clinton Foundation.”
“All DFAT funding agreements are with Clinton Health Access Initiative - a separate legal entity from Clinton Foundation since 2010 – to deliver HIV/AIDS treatment to a range of Asia-Pacific countries.”
For your background, the “range of measures concerning transparency and accountability” of the Foundation mentioned in DFAT’s briefing document refers to an agreement between the Clinton Foundation and the US Government concerning Hillary Clinton’s nomination as Secretary of State. It bears no relation to the Australian Government’s funding agreements with Clinton Health Access Initiative.
Firstly to the "funding arrangements accompanied by legal funding agreements with specified outcomes, deliverables, budgets and conditions".
I have reviewed the Independent Completion Reports and other documents regarding the Funding Agreements DFAT agreed with the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative Inc. It's significant that the ICR reports lament the absence of "specified outcomes and deliverables".
Here is my analysis of the ICR in respect of the PNG donation to Clinton.
The ICR paints a frightening picture of an Australian Government aid program that handed over more than $11M to the Clintons - and as the report says did it with:
no statement of project goal or purpose,
no clear Program Area objectives and
The Australian Government need not burden taxpayers with the cost of further enquiries to establish the nature of is donations to the Clintons. The Clinton Foundation exhibits the details on its returns to the IRS justifying its tax-exempt privileges.
The Clinton Foundation is explicit about the tax-exempt purpose for which it is authorised to do business - that is honouring Bill Clinton's legacy through a Presidential Library. Clinton's extension of "honouring the legacy" by "continuing the work" of his presidency is quoted on the Foundation's annual returns as the purpose for which the Foundation solicits donations. At some point the IRS may investigate and even revoke the extended "continuing the work of the Clinton Presidency" extension of the Clinton Foundation's authorised tax-exempt status, but as to the circumstances that prevailed during 2006-09 and continue to today, the Library and Clinton worship is the purpose for which each and every revenue dollar is received.
IN each of the years 2006-09, the Clinton Foundation reported that 100% of its revenues were donations made for the purpose set out in its authority for tax exemption.
In those two questions filed with the Foundation's annual IRS returns, the Clinton Foundation confirms that every cent it received is a deductible donation (from the payer's tax, whether claimed or not) made for the purpose of honouring Clinton.
The Financial Reports also display to donors and the general public, including the Australian Government this precise definition of the way the Foundation treats any and all revenue.
Gifts of cash and other assets received without donor stipulations are reported as unrestricted revenue and net assets. Gifts received with a donor stipulation that limits their use are reported as temporarily or permanently restricted revenue and net assets. When a donor stipulated time restriction ends or purpose restriction is accomplished, temporarily restricted net assets are reclassified to unrestricted net assets and reported in the statement of activities as net assets released from restrictions. Gifts that are originally restricted by the donor and for which the restriction is met in the same time period are recorded as temporarily restricted and then released from restriction.
DFAT can put whatever spin it wants on the loose agreements that accompanied the millions we sent to the Clintons. The facts are that each payment of our money was solicited by the Clintons as a donation, was received and accounted for as a donation and the purpose for which that donation was paid was the very loose and arguable "continuing the work" or lifestyle of Bill Clinton's Presidency through a library foundation. That a poorly executed AIDS initiative in PNG is part of that purpose of praising Clinton is very much incidental.
The nett effect of the way the Clintons solicited and received our money is that after the period of time covered by DFAT's contracts was completed, 100% of our money was immediately released into the consolidated Clinton donations pool to be spent as the Clinton Foundation sees fit. One way it's spent our money is to employ people and contractors who've been assigned to the Hillary Clinton campaign teams, either at ostensible arms length or in many instances working within the Clinton Foundation. It's a concern that DFAT's misunderstanding of the nature of the Clinton Foundation and the matters displayed in the notes to its financial returns is so materially wrong - and that as a result Australia is donating money that it can't control and which is being used to support a candidate for election as President of the United States.
Australia's claim that Bill Clinton is the founder of the Clinton Foundation is false
One of Sydney's harbour ferries is the Dawn Fraser. The Australian swimming champion was honoured to have a small ship named in her honour, but she's never asserted rights to the ticket money or late night parties on board with friends.
The claim that Bill Clinton founded the Clinton Foundation is false - and his perjury and propensity to lie publicly and under oath are relevant factors in the Australian Government's assessment of its history of donating money in answer to Clinton's solicitations.
Like the other presidential libraries, the “William J Clinton Presidential Foundation” was founded on 23 October 1997 by 3 citizens from Arkansas. Bill Clinton was 10 months into his final 4 year term as President. During 3.25 years he had to run in that term he’d be impeached, charged with perjury, found in contempt of court and disbarred as a lawyer. Doing the legwork to create a foundation to honour his legacy may not have been his top personal priority.
Clinton’s perjury and disbarment disqualified him from acting as an officer or authorised representative of a US charitable organisation, so it’s an important background consideration in the context of the donations he has solicited from Australian taxpayers.
During 1995/97 President Clinton and 22 year old Monica Lewinsky maintained a clandestine sexual affair. Nine known sexual encounters took place in the Clinton family home and Hillary Clinton was present in the home for 7 of them. Lewinsky started out as an Intern in the President’s office but in April 1996 her supervisors transferred her to The Pentagon because of the amount of “time” she was spending with Clinton.
Ms Lewinsky confided her distress at being moved along with details of the affair to a friend Linda Tripp who also worked at The Pentagon. Tripp told Lewinsky to retain the gifts Clinton had given her and not to dry clean a semen stained blue dress. Ms Tripp also spoke to a literary agent Lucianne Goldberg who advised Tripp to record her telephone conversations with Lewinsky and Tripp started doing that in September 1997. Goldberg started briefing reporters about the Lewinsky affair but no media outlet would report the story.
Around that time Bill Clinton was being investigated over the Whitewater scandal, White House interference in FBI files and the sacking of the longstanding White House Travel Office who were replaced by friends of the Clintons. Clinton was also being sued by at least one former lover Ms Paula Jones.
In January 1998 Lewinsky told Tripp that she’d sworn a false affidavit denying her affair with Clinton for use in Clinton’s defence in court in the Paul Jones matter. Lewinsky asked Tripp to lie under oath about their conversations. As a result, Tripp delivered the tape recordings of her conversations with Lewinsky to Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr.
Goldberg wanted to sell books and she tried to sell the story into a range of mainstream media with the lurid details of the gifts, the semen stained dress and the recorded conversations. Still no main stream media outlet reported the story.
On 17 January 1998 a conservative website run from the home of its founder Matt Drudge reported that Newsweek was sitting on a story by reporter Michael Isikoff (a friend of Goldberg) about Clinton’s affair with Lewinsky. On 14 January 1998 the Washington Post followed up on the Drudge Report’s story. Reporting of the Lewinsky scandal became a very big mainstream story.
The story swirled in the media and as details emerged Clinton was under pressure to answer specific allegations about Lewinsky.
Clinton had sworn a deposition in the Paula Jones matter in which he denied allegations put by the Jones legal team of "similar fact" or "propensity" conduct on the part of Clinton with Ms Lewinsky.
The public wanted to know if Clinton could explain why Ms Lewininsky turned her mind to the Paula Jones proceeding swore an affidavit that supported Clinton but was at odds with the recorded conversations she'd had with Tripp. Or why Lewinsky asked her friend Tripp to lie under oath about her conversations regarding Clinton.But most directly, importantly, and problematically for Clinton was the request for him to explain the presence of the unique evidentiary DNA recovered from the contribution squirted on Ms Lewinsky's blue dress.
By 24 January 1998 President Clinton recognised the public wanted answers. And Bill gave them answers. Totally false but answers nonetheless.
At a Press Conference with his wife Hillary by his side and Vice President Gore standing behind him Clinton spoke about unrelated matters for a lengthy warmup, then looked down the barrel of the camera to deliver this famous statement:
Now, I have to go back to work on my State of the Union speech. And I worked on it until pretty late last night. But I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I'm going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people. Thank you.
On 27 January Hillary Clinton went on the NBC Today show to support Clinton lies with her own. ”The great story here for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president.”
Because Bill was dealing with this matter and the subsequent prosecutions, impeachment, fines, perjury charges and disbarment as a lawyer for 5 years over his contempt for court proceedings and the truth, Bill didn't have much spare time left to be the Founder of a Library.
Skip Rutherford and 2 other locals were the founders of “The William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation”, a “Presidential Archival Depository” ( defined in 44 USC Sec 2010(c)) incorporated as a Non-Profit Corporation by the Secretary of the US State of Arkansas.
The Clinton Foundation which Australia's DFAT says was founded by Clinton may have metastasised as a function of his influence, but he's not the founder.
In 1997 the 3 founding officers of the Clinton Foundation applied to the US IRS for registration as a 501(c)(3) charitable foundation exempt from income tax. The IRS formally registered the Clinton Foundation as a charitable foundation in 1998 and as of today the only purpose for which it’s registered to trade is the operation of the Presidential Archival Depository set out in the original 1997 application.
Because the Clinton Foundation operates as a 501(c)(3) charitable foundation, money it receives is recorded and treated at law as donations. A donation is a gift - while donations to a 501(c)(3) may be “tied” to a particular purpose, the recourse for those who make donations and later become dissatisfied is different from a client or customer purchasing a service or goods that turn out to be deficient. Likewise the Clinton related purpose to which the Foundation puts our donated money may be something vastly different from the intention conveyed to Australian taxpayers.
In each of the Australian Government’s dealings with the US based Clinton Foundation the Australian Government has donated money for Clinton’s Foundation to do with it what it will.
At the time Clinton personally signed the 2006 MOU with Alexander Downer he was not authorised to act for the US Registered 501(c)(3) charity because, unique among the presidents, he had a perjury finding against him and was a disbarred lawyer as a result.
Which entity did Clinton represent at the MOU signing?
Until 2013 William J. Clinton was not an officer or fiduciary of the Foundation. He was not a fit or proper person to be an officer of a 501(c)(3) from 2001 to 2006, the period during which he was a disbarred lawyer following court judgements against him for lying under oath. Nor could he represent or act for the Foundation under a Power of Attorney.
The “Clinton Foundation HIV/Aids Initiative Inc” (which marketed itself as “CHAI”, a very widely used and popular acronym) was incorporated in March 2004. It was registered with Massachusetts corporate regulatory authorities and operated as a separate discrete entity from the Clinton Foundation from a head office at 225 Water Street Quincy, Massachusetts.
CHAI applied for 501(C)(3) registration for the purpose of distributing HIV/Aids medicines and strengthening health systems but was knocked back. It was apparently never registered as a 501(c)(3) for that purpose. The US laws about charitable foundations is replete with cases where a charity sought to compete with the conventional business and trade of the free market economy, in particular in the pharmaceutical industry. Governments levy taxes on all sorts of businesses who could argue they act as a community good. Distributing pharmaceuticals with a tax exemption in order to undercut existing distributors of pharmaceuticals who pay taxes is not a charitable purpose in the United States.
It's a particularly odious basis upon which to claim tax exemption from US taxes when the major financial beneficiaries are dubious characters from India like the friends of the Clintons in the deadly drug manufacturing company Ranbaxy.
Aspen Pharmacare Holdings Ltd., of Johannesburg, South Africa;
Cipla Ltd., of Mumbai, India;
Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., of Delhi, India; and
Matrix Laboratories Ltd., of Hyderabad, India.
The agreement covered antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) for delivery to African countries and the Caribbean through the Clinton Foundation HIV/AIDS Initiative. Business for those pharma companies went through the roof.
That's Indian pharma executive and conman Nimmagad PRASAD on the right behind Clinton. Prior to the Clinton deal PRASAD bought a rundown Indian pharmaceutical company and renamed it Matrix Laboraties.
The deal with Clinton was very good for him.
He sold most of Matrix to the US pharma company Mylan and by 2006 had taken his initial investment of Indian Rs. 30Million ($500K AUD) to 5.7Billion ($110M AUD).
In 2012 he was charged with corruption and jailed for 17 months.
Ranbaxy's history is worse. By 2004 Ranbaxy was on notice of a formal investigation by the World Health Organisation over the sale by Ranbaxy of adulterated and worthless drugs labelled as the genuine article. In May 2013 Ranbaxy paid a record fine of USD $5ooM to settle the US Department of Justice criminal complaints. As the final US DoJ details settling the long running and very public case against Ranbaxy were completed, Bill Clinton jetted off to India to give what he thought was a private paid speech praising Ranbaxy and its executives. This is from the Indian Times, April 2013.
Australia is implicated in the Ranbaxy scandal. On 23 March 2013 a DFAT official wrote to me:
“Prior to 2013, a small amount of Australian aid money was expended on Ranbaxy pharmaceutical products in Papua New Guinea to support the PNG Government’s health programs.”
Media Liaison Officer
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
At least $100M of taxpayer funded Australian aid money has been used in the purchase of pharmaceuticals under a relationship established between the Clinton Foundation and the Australian Government in February 2006. That is in addition to amounts donated directly to the Clinton Foundation.
After working his way forward from being a professional executive in a pharma company to a promoter of the pharma major Matrix Laboratories, Nimmagadda Prasad is now an entrepreneur with interests in multiple and unrelated segments. After handing over Matrix to Mylan, the focus now is on managing the investments with an objective of creating pancha ratnas (five jewels), Prasad reveals in an interview. Excerpts:
After handing over Matrix Labs to Mylan, you seem to have turned into a serial entrepreneur. Are you still with the pharma sector or is there any plan to diversify into new areas? Yes, after Matrix, I started looking at various other sectors basically from an investment point of view. But, even during the Matrix days, I was keen on evaluating options in other areas. With that plan in mind, I had decided to create pancha ratnas (five jewels) for myself to invest. .....................
From being a citalopram player, Matrix has played its cards to ally with former US president Bill Clinton to sell anti retrovirals (ARVs) in some developing markets. How much revenue does the Clinton Foundation provide to Matrix? The Clinton Foundation does not buy anything from us. They only facilitate the supply of drugs to affected markets by creating the necessary logistics. At a time when Indian products did not have much credibility in the market, the Foundation gave buyers the required confidence about the products. They had set up the distribution channels. They prepared the protocols for compliance and guided the teams in the affected countries on usage of the drug.
Do you discuss price with the Foundation? Yes, even today, the Foundation negotiates with us on the price. But they don’t buy it directly. They negotiate the price on behalf of the governments willing to buy the product.
And Australia was there with more than $100M of taxpayer money buying often useless Clinton "facilitations".
The Clinton Foundation claimed in its 2005 annual financial return that the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative Inc had been merged into the Clinton Foundation. That claim is false. The CHAI entity continued to exist as a separate registered corporation until it was dissolved by the Massachusetts regulator in March 2008 for failing to file financial returns.
In its 2005 filing with the IRS, the Clinton Foundation disclosed its relationship with the Clinton Foundation HIV Aids Initiative Inc (note the "Inc' referring to a separate incorporated entity).
DFAT originally described the MOU as a partnership with the William J. Clinton Foundation.
Australia was to provide $25M to be supplemented by Clinton Foundation funding for projects in China, Papua New Guinea and Vietnam over 4 years. Separate funding agreements were to be negotiated for each country/project.
Austender details record the actual contracts under the MOU as being between DFAT and the Clinton HIV/Aids Initiative with its address in Water Street, Quincy - i.e. the entity that was dissolved during the term of these contracts.
Independent completion reviews of the CHAI contracts were damning. The reviews reported there were no agreed outcomes established at the beginning, no performance indicators or milestones, no targets to be met before payments were made and no means to effectively monitor the CHAI in the countries in which they operated.
A $15M contract for PNG is reported as having a commencement date of 14 August 2006, however Austender did not publish details of the contract award until July 2010. The independent review of the contract found there was no clear start date, no agreed deliverables, and no document recording what the Clinton Foundation was to deliver and when.
In the second half of 2006 a young graduate from New York who was working as an accounts payable clerk in a compensation authority was appointed as the PNG head for the Clinton Foundation HIV/Aids Initiative. He had no experience in HIV/medicine/start-ups or PNG.
At the MOU signing in February 2006, Bill Clinton acknowledged the new PNG head’s predecessor Ruby Shang. Ms Shang was the head and only Clinton employee for not only PNG but of all Asia/Pacific operations for the Clinton Foundation. Simultaneously, Ruby Shang ran the family earthmoving equipment dealership for Caterpillar in Vietnam, Clinton operations in PNG, Indonesia, Vietnam and China that Australia was paying for as well as providing the Clinton Foundation’s climate change expertise.
PNG law requires registration of foreign entities or the incorporation of a PNG corporation before foreign businesses can trade or open accounts in PNG.
To receive payments due to it in PNG that second half of 2006, the Clinton Foundation somehow secured the obviously unlawful and improper incorporation of an incorporated association named the “Clinton Foundation HIV/Aids Initiative - PNG”. It was unlawfully registered by the PNG regulator even though no rules or objects of the association were produced, there was no evidence of a committee agreeing to nominate and authorise a representative to apply for incorporation and despite the unwaivable requirement for 30 days to elapse after an intention to incorporate was advertised (to allow for objections), the Clinton Foundation HIV/Aids Initiative Inc was incorporated on the day the application was hurriedly lodged.
CHAI was established in 2002 by President Bill Clinton. Shortly after UNITAID’s creation in 2006, the two organizations set out to reach groups in developing countries that were neglected by HIV drug markets: adults living with HIV that needed “second-line” antiretroviral treatment and children living with HIV. CHAI’s entrepreneurial approach to providing access to health care combined with UNITAID’s innovative financing and funding model was a potent mix in influencing market dynamics for HIV treatments.
Papua New Guinea: Papua New Guinea is one of the only countries in the UNITAID-CHAI Project to domestically fund its transition from CHAI/UNITAID projects. Starting in 2006, CHAI and the Department of Health worked to build clinical capacity for paediatric HIV treatment. As the UNITAID paediatric project approached its end date, CHAI and Papua New Guinea’s National Department of Health, National AIDS Council Secretariat and parliamentary representatives implemented a successful transition. While the existence of available resources made the transition possible, early planning, collaborative discussions and the work of key domestic advocates created consensus and national ownership. Read the full UNITAID/CHAI Papua New Guinea story [PDF, 270 KB].
While Australia was directly funding the Clinton Foundation in PNG under the MOU, we were also providing aid funding to the PNG Government to run its health department. The Clinton Foundation entered into separate agreements and at least 3 MOUs with the PNG Government (which were funded by Australian money) without the extra funds increasing the headcount or output of the PNG unit.
The expectation that the partnership in PNG between the Australian Government would receive funding from us that was complemented by Clinton Foundation money was laughable. Compared to the $15M Australia contributed the Clinton Foundation could point to a $400,000 purchase of supplies as its contribution.
The Pacific Medical Centre Super Hospital that never was.
In 2010 Hillary Clinton was US Secretary of State. The Clinton Foundation was required to lodge details with the US Govt Ethics body of its involvement in any activity that might conflict with the Secretary of State’s activities - given she’s Bill’s wife.
In her start of year planning session Secretary Clinton noted that her first trip would include travel to Papua New Guinea, a remote sovereign nation where 85% of employment is subsistence village farming. PNG well heeled leaders were of such quality that PNG rated 20 points lower than Zimbabwe on the TI international corruption index.
In November 2009 Prime Minister Somare slipped a $20M allocation for facilitation/establishment costs associated with a yet to be announced, yet to be funded yet to be designed superhospital.
In January Secretary Clinton was enroute to PNG for the rare trip. As she landed in Hawaii word came to her that Haiti's earthquake had caused more opportunity for the Clinton Foundation that had been expected. She cancelled the PNG visit and turned around to Haiti.
In April 2010 Somare flew in the PNG government private jet to New York for a meeting with Bill Clinton.
In June Somare secured a substantial loan from the Chinese Government to develop 4 small regional hospitals and pay for new plant and equipment throughout the health system. After weighing the needs of those communities with the PR potential of Bill Clinton's support for the bigger project, the budget papers were altered by Somare's minister to apply the Chinese loan money to build the superhospital.
Here's the justification.
And here's the budgetary impact.
Clinton’s CGI was scheduled for the last days of September/early October 2010.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had by then found time in her busy schedule to return to PNG for a rare and unusual state visit. The week before the CGI announcement was due, Somare’s health minister leaked documents to the press suggesting the Clinton Foundation support was locked in and an announcement would be made in New York by Somare and Clinton at the CGI.
Heavily redacted US State Department Ethics office correspondence released under FOI suggests a flurry of state department activity associated with the US State Department's most senior Washington based official responsible for the East Asia Pacific region including PNG. The Chief of the State Department's ethics division, responsible for managing all Hillary, Bill, Clinton Foundation and Secretary of State conflicts was called in. While the redactions do not give much of the content away, an obviously significant issue was reported to the Ethics Dept by the Clinton Foundation, it was escalated to the Chief of the Ethics Department and he involved the US East Asia and Pacific Assistant Deputy Secretary (two levels down from SecState) in managing the conflict.
By the time of the late September/October CGI expected announcement, there was deathly silence from both Clinton and the pay to play "featured attendee" Prime Minister Somare.
When Hillary arrived in PNG a short time later local expectations were high that she'd have the answers.
While Hillary extended the arm of consolation to Prime Minister Somare, there was no Chinese Government funded $500M hospital deal involving the Clinton Foundation. It wasn't going to happen. And apparently Hillary wasn't happy.
Friends, Papuans, countrymen.
Lend me your ears!
Because there's not much here now for the Clinton Foundation,
I come to bury Somare's reputation, not to praise him!
The $10M Clinton Foundation donation that made Kevin Rudd the smartest leader in the world
On 1 April 2008 Kevin Rudd visited Washington and New York. He had a private meeting with the Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton, running against Obama for the Democrat nomination.
Rudd had publicly committed his support for Clinton over Obama in an interview on Australian television. Clinton was trying to raise funds for her presidential campaign and the Clinton Foundation was up to its neck in the pay to play payments at the time.
As the pair came out of their conference room, the close-knit group of Australian media travelling with Rudd crowded in on them for an impromptu doorstop interview.
At the end of that chat Rudd turned to Clinton and said sotto voce “Let us know if we can help with anything.”
Michelle Grattan travelling with the PM reported about then little known Clinton Foundation and Rudd's comment to Ms Clinton.
Bill Clinton has invited him to address a climate change function he is involved in.
It is said this was the context of Rudd’s intriguing, softly spoken sentence to Clinton: "Let us know if we can help with anything."
On 19 September 2008 Rudd unexpectedly announced his government would create “The Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute Ltd”.
It was an unexpected $400M commitment which had not been included in the budget.
Rudd then took the Government 737 for a spin to New York just in time for the Clinton Global Initiative - 23-26 September 2008.
On 25 September 2008 at the Clinton Global Initiative in New York, Kevin Rudd announced an MOU with the Clinton Foundation.
Australia Signs Memorandum of Understanding with Clinton Climate Initiative New York
Release Date: 25/09/2008
Release Type: Media Release
Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd today signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Clinton Climate Initiative of the William J. Clinton Foundation.
Under the MOU Australia and the Clinton Climate Initiative will work together to help tackle climate change.
The MOU will see Australia and the William J. Clinton Foundation collaborate to;
Deploy carbon capture and storage technology to large scale projects.
Examine policies to encourage large scale solar power generation in Australia.
Design collaborative policies in conjunction with large cities and other organisations on improving energy efficiency.
The William J Clinton Foundation will work with the Australian Government through Australia's Global Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Initiative announced by Prime Minister Rudd last week.
In December 2008 the Clinton Foundation signed an MOU with the incoming Obama presidential office on the management of conflicts of interest between Hillary Clinton’s obligations to the USA as Secretary of State and the Clinton Foundation’s loyalty to other people’s money.
That agreement noted that the Australian Government was the only donor to the Clinton Climate Initiative prior to December 2008.
Rudd arranged for an urgent and unexpected payment from the Australian Government direct to the Clinton Foundation. The payment was later the subject of some sort of ledger transfer, formally described as a novation from the Australian Government to the GCCI Ltd - a financial accounting entry that makes the accounts look like the Australian Government had never made the payment to the Clinton Foundation in the first place.
Rudd's Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute was not incorporated until the next opportunity to trot out an announcement for aggrandisement arose at the 2009 L'Aquila G2o conference in Italy.
This video shows the intensity of interest global leaders had in finding distractions to avoid listening to Rudd.
The payment from the Australian Government shows up in the books of the off balance sheet Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute Ltd here.
William J. Clinton Foundation (CLINTON FOUNDATION)
The Institute provided AU$10 million to the Clinton Foundation to support the work being conducted through the Clinton Climate Initiative to accelerate key ‘Early Mover’ CCS projects around the world.
However in balancing the requirements to
meet the Clinton's requirements for money in 2008, and
cover his own backside by "novating" the payment to the GCCSI, but
delaying incorporation of the GCCSI until mid 2009 so he'd have something meaningful to announce at the L'Aquila conference where Obama and the really big guys would be
Rudd was snookered because the Clinton Foundation booked the payment as it happened in 2008, as coming from the Australian Government.
There is no record of a $10M donation or any donation from the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute Limited to the Clinton Foundation at all.
This photo was some consolation.
But Rudd's Clinton related payoff came at the 2009 CGI where he received the ‘most honoured guest” treatment.
The jackals of Hillary Clinton's vast right wing conspiracy working for the Murdoch Press's Australian flagship, The Australian, were somehow leaked details of Rudd's private breakfast meeting with the very famous Bill Clinton. Further, the vipers of the media were somehow leaked details of Clinton's moderate sober analysis of Rudd made in a private personal feedback giving setting.
This selection of happy snaps records the happy event.
The Global Philanthropist - what a difference $14M and one week at the Clinton Global Initiative makes!
In September 2012, just prior to the Clinton Global Initiative which and the UN's global leaders week, Australian prime minister Julia Gillard was floundering in the polls.
She carried baggage like this.
Gillard returned from her week in New York invigorated and with a new outlook on life.
She called in Marie Clare magazine for an "at home" interview featuring herself and her gal pals from the "handbag hitsquad".
Gillard's new lease on life arose from the new career she announced she'd pursue after politics - the Global Philanthropist.
So what happened in New York with Hillary and the Clinton Foundation?
To understand September 2012, we need to go back to February 2008.
On 18 February 2008 Climate Change Minister Penny Wong announced that the Clinton Foundation had selected a satellite based carbon accounting system developed at a cost to the Australian Government of several million dollars.
“I am very pleased that following a global search of forest carbon measurement systems, the Clinton Climate Initiative selected Australia’s National Carbon Accounting System (NCAS) as the platform for a global roll-out in developing countries.”
Wong’s departmental files disconcertingly describe a Procurement Advice in which we appear to be paying the Clinton Foundation to use our stuff.
Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency 2009 file DCC2009/2284 Procurement - Advice - International Forest Carbon Initiative - Joint activities with the Clinton Foundation and the Carbon Accounting System
The Clinton Foundation took our Carbon Accounting System and used it as the basis for a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation for $7M to fund 4 years (2008 to 2012) of work in Kenya.
The Rockefeller Foundation's completion report stated , “……the Clinton Climate Initiative's role was to establish and test a National Carbon Accounting System (NCAS) at the policy level (in Kenya) and set up a number of viable demonstration projects at the community level”.
So Clinton got $7M for using software, geospatial systems and satellite measurement capacity developed and paid for by Australia. We even sent Australian support people to Kenya to help him do it.
An indication of the Clinton Foundation's access to in-house expertise can be found in this profile piece on Ruby Shang, who also fronted as the in-house expert in Asia for HIV/Aids, Malaria and running Caterpillar earthmover dealerships.
By 2012 Clinton was done and dusted in Kenya for the Rockefellers, thanks to Australia's Department of Climate Change, our CSIRO and the support we'd provided to Clinton in the field.
18 September 2012 was the Tuesday before the biggest week of Julia Gillard’s life.
Julia Gillard was #1 “Pay to Play” ticket holder for US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation at the pivotal UN leaders week and CGI meeting in New York.
In the last months of Hillary’s time as Secretary of State, Pay to Play was at its absolute peak. The stakes were as high as the price and it was our Ms Gillard treading the red carpet with Hillary.
How could Julia Gillard come up with $10M for Clinton Pay to Play when she couldn’t even pay for her home renovations?
On 18 September 2012, Greg Combet came to the rescue.
With no fanfare, the Clinton Foundation appeared on the Austender website as the successful tenderer for a job that needed urgent and unexpected attention from the Australian Government.
The design of a carbon accounting system for Kenya.
Who'd have guessed the Clinton Foundation could manage that?
Combet's announcement of the initial $500M tranche of what was a $14M overall donation was met with derision.
Gillard flew to New York that weekend. On Monday 24 September the Australian PM had an official dinner with President Obama, a speech to the Asian Society and had been invited to attend the first session of the UN General Assembly.
She cancelled all of them.
The only commitment Gillard kept that day was to Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Global Initiative.
On Monday morning the Clinton Global Initiative breakfast function seated Madeleine Allbright at the head table, Madeline’s daughter Alice was being installed as the CEO of the Global Partnership for Education while Gillard was being lined up to be its Chair.
I am honoured to announce Australia's founding membership of the Equal Futures Partnership. I am delighted to do so in the company of Secretary Clinton. Hillary – you have done so much to inspire women and girls all around the world. ...
Prime Minister Julia Gillard today announced Australia would join with the United States and other international partners to expand economic opportunities for women and to increase women’s participation in politics and civil society. Ms Gillard announced that Australia was...
It’s a great honour to be champion of Secretary-General Ban’s Education First Initiative. This is a very significant tribute to Australia’s work to improve education in developing countries through our aid program. ...
Mr President, congratulations on your election. You now preside over a forum for every voice – an Assembly of all people and nations – for no country or bloc to dominate solely or lead as one alone – where small and medium sized countries are truly heard. ...
Just as Kevin Rudd had done in 2008, Julia Gillard was positioned beautifully by Hillary and the Clinton Foundation that week.
When Gillard left politics, the Clinton Gravy Train dropped her off at a range of locations. Ms Gillard did not forget the favours.
JULIA Gillard is no longer our Prime Minister but she is still spending Australian government money. Lots of it.
And Ms Gillard has the sort of big money to spend on education her successor Tony Abbott could only dream about. She revealed today it now amounts to close to $30 billion.
She is chair of the Global Partnership for Education which will spend that amount on educating children in around 60 countries, and tweeted today: “Delighted a record $28.5B has been raised for GPE.”
Australia will contribute, with Foreign Minister Julie Bishop today announcing a $140 million commitment she said would help as many as 22 million youngsters go to school.
The Global Partnership for Education is our biggest multilateral partner on schooling and the latest contribution will bring Australia’s pledges so far to $460 million.
“Education is a key pillar of the Government’s new aid policy framework,” said Ms Bishop.
Julia Gillard endorsed the Abbott policy change when she praised the “far-sighted leadership in our partner countries — donors and developing country partners alike”.
“No other organisation has a partnership structure that has leveraged such substantial funds from developing countries. The Global Partnership for Education provides the long term, systemic support that governments need to build stable, effective education systems.”
The record four-year funding for GPE was announced in Brussels at a conference attended by Australia’s parliamentary secretary to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Brett Mason.
The late President Reagan spoke of Presidential Libraries as "classrooms of democracy".
The Clinton Foundation's extra-curricular syllabus is an anathema to Reagan's noble aspiration.
Australian politicians have received handsome rewards for arranging taxpayer donations to fund the Clinton Family Lifestyle.
It's way past time doubts about their motivations were cleared up.