IRS Halted 2019 Clinton Foundation Probe, Silenced Whistleblowers: ‘Can’t Talk About the CF’

In a twist that seems to align with a pattern of halted investigations into the Clintons, the IRS began probing the Clinton Foundation in 2019 but then inexplicably ceased its efforts, according to memos obtained by Just The News. “Can’t talk about the CF [Clinton Foundation],” one of the memos bluntly stated, cutting off communication with two whistleblowers. This revelation follows years of tension surrounding the Clinton Foundation and its financial dealings.

Under President Trump’s administration, the IRS initiated a criminal tax investigation into the foundation, which had previously been shielded from scrutiny under past administrations. Notably, the probe was shut down abruptly, leaving whistleblowers, who had been working closely with IRS agents, in the lurch. These whistleblowers included a highly respected former federal money laundering analyst who had testified before Congress on issues such as terrorism financing.

The documents, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, reveal ongoing federal concerns about the Clintons’ charitable organization. They paint a picture of a government frequently thwarted in its attempts to investigate prominent Democratic figures. John Moynihan, a retired DEA financial crimes analyst, and Larry Doyle, a corporate tax compliance expert, had compiled years of research into the foundation, presenting evidence to Congress of alleged financial misconduct.

In 2018, whistleblowers Lawrence Doyle and John Moynihan argued that the Clinton Foundation was operating outside its bounds as a 501(c)(3) organization. They suggested it acted more like a global fund, brokering money and pharmaceuticals, akin to the operations in Geneva, Switzerland. Mr. Moynihan revealed that a staggering 60% of donations to the foundation were used for “administration fees,” contrasting sharply with the industry standard of 10-15%.

Doyle emphasized, “The investigation clearly demonstrates that the [Clinton] Foundation was not a charitable organization per se, but in pointed fact was a closely held family partnership.” He continued, explaining that the foundation was governed in a way that primarily served to advance the personal interests of the Clintons. This was corroborated by their financial analysis and supporting documentation.

Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH) sought further details from the whistleblowers on the foundation’s alleged role as an agent of a foreign government. Doyle explained, “They were brokering money and they were brokering pharmaceuticals — they were an agent of money through these donors.” The foundation purportedly took fees from these transactions, negotiating relationships with pharmaceutical companies.

Moynihan further elaborated to Congressman Jordan, describing how the Clinton Foundation operated as a hybrid of a private foundation and a public charity, which they were not authorized to do. He shockingly admitted, “Our analysis shows that this hybrid modeled the global fund in Geneva, Switzerland.” The foundation allegedly avoided paying taxes that a partnership would, potentially misleading the IRS.

The investigation’s roots trace back to 2017 when former Attorney General Jeff Sessions appointed US Attorney John Huber to look into the Clinton Foundation. However, Huber’s investigation concluded without any charges, raising questions about its thoroughness. Key whistleblowers Doyle and Moynihan were never interviewed, and crucial evidence against the foundation was reportedly lost multiple times.

US Attorney John Durham later took over parts of Huber’s investigation. Unfortunately, this subsequent probe also ended without any charges, leaving many unanswered questions. This pattern of investigations into the Clintons ending inconclusively has drawn criticism from conservative circles.

The perception that influential Democratic figures escape accountability is a recurring theme in these discussions. Many conservatives believe that the Clintons have long been insulated by their political connections. The halted IRS investigation adds fuel to the fire for those who suspect a double standard in how justice is applied.

Critics argue that the Clintons’ philanthropic endeavors are more about influence-peddling than genuine charity. The significant administration fees and alleged financial irregularities only bolster these suspicions. As whistleblowers like Doyle and Moynihan continue to speak out, the call for transparency grows louder.

For many, the issue is not just about the Clintons but the integrity of the institutions tasked with upholding the law. The IRS’s abrupt cessation of its investigation raises concerns about external pressures influencing its decisions. As more information comes to light, the public’s demand for accountability remains steadfast.

The ongoing saga of the Clinton Foundation reflects broader themes of political influence and accountability in America. Many conservatives see this as emblematic of a system that too often protects the powerful at the expense of justice. The quest for truth and transparency continues, driven by those who refuse to let these matters be swept under the rug.