https://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/05/did-the-clinton-foundation-have-a-storefront-accountant-like-madoff/


By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: May 24, 2016

Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton
Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton

A growing number of red flags are cropping up around the charity operation
known as the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation. The title tells
you right off the bat that there is no anti-nepotism policy in place.
Bernie Madoff didn’t believe in an anti-nepotism policy either: his
brother, wife, two sons and niece worked for him. That didn’t work out so
well for any of them.

What is thus far beyond dispute regarding the Clinton Foundation’s finances
is that Hillary Clinton’s political operatives have been on its payroll and
that it failed to report tens of millions of dollars in foreign government
donations on its 990 tax return to the IRS. As Reuters reported last year:

“For three years in a row beginning in 2010, the Clinton Foundation
reported to the IRS that it received zero in funds from foreign and U.S.
governments, a dramatic fall-off from the tens of millions of dollars in
foreign government contributions reported in preceding years.

“Those entries were errors, according to the foundation: several foreign
governments continued to give tens of millions of dollars toward the
foundation’s work on climate change and economic development through this
three-year period.”

Reuters also reported last November that it had found that a major program
of the Clinton Foundation, the Clinton Health Access Initiative, “had
misreported funding sources by millions of dollars.” The Foundation said in
response that it would refile its 2012 and 2013 tax returns known as 990s
with the IRS.

This sounds like a lot of sloppy accounting. We decided to see if there was
a storefront accountant involved. The storefront image came to mind because
Madoff’s accountant, David Friehling, operated out of a storefront and was
a sole proprietor.

According to the U.S. Justice Department, this storefront operation failed
to conduct any of the following regarding the Bernard L. Madoff Investment
Securities (BLMIS):

“(a) conduct independent verification of BLMIS assets; (b) review material
sources of BLMIS revenue, including commissions; (c) examine a bank account
through which billions of dollars of BLMIS client funds flowed; (d) verify
liabilities related to BLMIS client accounts; or (e) verify the purchase
and custody of securities by BLMIS. Friehling also failed to test internal
controls as required under GAAP and GAAS standards. For example, Friehling
did not take any steps to test internal controls over areas such as BLMIS’
redemption of client funds, the payment of invoices for corporate expenses,
or the purchase of securities by BLMIS on behalf of its clients.”

But the Clinton Foundation is no Bernie Madoff accounting operation.
According to 13 years of Federal tax returns available for public
inspection at the public interest web site for ProPublica, from 2001
through 2012 the Clinton Foundation’s tax returns were prepared by BKD LLP,
a national accounting firm that boasts of approximately 2400 employees in
50 U.S. states. That’s a long time not to have an auditor rotation. It also
covers the years of 2010, 2011 and 2012 when Reuters reports, and the
Foundation has acknowledged, that it failed to report tens of millions of
dollars in donations from foreign governments on its Federal tax returns.

The Clinton Foundation’s 2013 Federal 990 tax return, the latest one we
could locate, shows that BKD LLP has been replaced with an even bigger
accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers or PwC, which has operations
worldwide. Would a big name like PwC automatically ensure trustworthy
financial reporting?

You could get the definitive word on that question by calling Dennis
Kozlowski, the former CEO of Tyco who looted over $100 million from the
company, including $6,000 for a shower curtain for his corporate residence
on Fifth Avenue. Kozlowski has completed his 6 and a half year prison term
so he might just pick up the phone. The looting of Tyco went down on the
watch of PwC.

In 2003, the Securities and Exchange Commission brought an action against
the PwC accountant, Richard Scalzo, barring him from signing the audits of
publicly traded companies that are filed with the SEC. The SEC noted in its
complaint:

“The Commission’s Order finds that multiple and repeated facts provided
notice to Scalzo regarding the integrity of Tyco’s senior management and
that Scalzo was reckless in not taking appropriate audit steps in the face
of this information. By the end of the Tyco annual audit for its fiscal
year ended Sept. 30, 1998, if not before, those facts were sufficient to
obligate Scalzo, pursuant to generally accepted auditing standards (GAAS),
to reevaluate the risk assessment of the Tyco audits and to perform
additional audit procedures, including further audit testing of certain
items (most notably, certain executive benefits, executive compensation,
and related party transactions). Scalzo did not take sufficient steps in
these regards. Accordingly, Scalzo recklessly failed to conduct the audits
in accordance with GAAS. The Order, therefore, finds that Scalzo engaged in
improper professional conduct. The Commission denies him the privilege of
practicing before the Commission as an accountant.”

According to the Los Angeles Times, a lot of money was sloshing between
Tyco and PwC. In a 2002 article, the newspaper reported:

“During Kozlowski’s tenure, Tyco became a lucrative client for
PricewaterhouseCoopers, which collected $50.1 million in fees from the
conglomerate in 2001. Before his indictment, Kozlowski also served as
chairman of the audit committee at defense contractor Raytheon Co., which
paid PricewaterhouseCoopers $84 million in fees in 2001, out of which only
$4 million was for audit services.” (PwC also does various forms of
consulting for its audit clients.)

What was the inside General Counsel at Tyco doing while all of this was
going on at the company? We reported on that back in 2008, writing as
follows:

“Back in 2002, Mark Belnick, who had previously been one of the legal go-to
guys for Wall Street as a rising star at corporate law firm Paul,Weiss,
Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, found himself transplanted as General Counsel
at fraud-infested Tyco International. Mr. Belnick inked a retention
agreement for himself and it was duly filed without fanfare at the top
corporate cop’s web site, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The
agreement guaranteed Mr. Belnick a payment of at least $10.6 million should
he commit a felony and be fired before October 2003.

“Very prescient fellow, Mr. Belnick was indeed charged with a few felonies
like grand larceny and securities fraud by the Manhattan District
Attorney’s office. Mr. Belnick was acquitted of those charges and the SEC
let him off the hook for aiding and abetting federal violations of
securities laws with a $100,000 penalty payment and a prohibition against
serving as an officer or director of a public company for five years. Mr.
Belnick agreed to the SEC settlement without admitting or denying the
charges. Mr. Belnick did not lose his law license…

“While Mr. Belnick was drafting his ‘felony bonus’ agreement with Tyco, he
was also teaching a law course at Cornell on ethics.”

Will we ever get to the bottom of what the real truth is on the money
spigot known as the Clinton Foundation? One man, Charles Ortel, armed with
a Harvard MBA and a long history in finance, has publicly vowed to get to
the bottom of what he is calling the “largest unprosecuted charity fraud
ever attempted.”

If Ortel is right and his findings preempt Hillary Clinton’s bid for the
Oval Office, he will have the undying thanks of a grateful nation for
sparing us a rerun of the Hill and Bill Show in the White House, a
confidence-draining possibility that a nation struggling under $19 trillion
in debt and a subpar growth rate of two percent or less since the 2008
crash can ill afford.

FacebookTwitterWhatsAppLinkedInEmail

Reply via email to