A whistleblower case involving a foundation launched by former President Bill Clinton and former first lady Hillary Clinton has been revived by a U.S. tax judge after special counsel John Durham’s bombshell final report.
The revival of the Clinton Foundation case comes after Durham chastised the feds over “significant failures to investigate allegations against” the charity.
According to Just The News: “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.
“The three recent rulings in other tax cases “may affect the parties’ positions as to the pending motions,” Gustafson wrote. “We will order further filings so that the parties may address those recent opinions.”
The whistleblowers, John Moynihan, a former federal agent, and Larry Doyle, a corporate tax compliance expert, have until June 30 to update their arguments while the judge gave the IRS until July 28 to respond.
Moynihan and Doyle testified to a House committee in December 2018. They told Congress that the Clinton Foundation was operating illegally as a foreign lobbyist by accepting overseas donations and then trying to influence U.S. policy.
“The foundation began acting as an agent of foreign governments early in its life and throughout its existence,” Moynihan testified at the time.
“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.”
Durham wrote of the Clinton Foundation:
“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.
“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,” he also said.
