It has been revealed that millions of New Zealand taxpayer dollars have been donated by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) to Hillary Clinton’s charity, the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI), a non-profit organisation created from the Clinton Foundation with the stated goal to reduce HIV/AIDs in Africa.

An MFAT spokesman confirmed to the NBR that between January 2010 and June 2016, $7.7 million of taxpayer funds had already been donated and another $6 million was to follow, keeping to a pledge to donate $13.7 million made by the government organisation in 2013.

ACT party member David Seymour commented “In a world where New Zealanders can crowdsource to buy a beach, it’s not clear what role there is for the government to collect taxes and contribute it to a global charity which is more than capable of reaching out and raising its own money.”

The big question is, why is our government sending millions of dollars overseas while at the same time cutting funding for crucial services which desperately need the money here in New Zealand?

To fully understand how Clinton charities operate and decide whether a single taxpayer dollar should have been donated, we first need to look at some of the controversies.

Over the past 15 years, the Washington Post can reveal the charities have raised over $2 billion dollars, mainly from big corporates, foreign governments and political donors. Many have called the contributions ‘pay for play’, where powerful donors exchange funds for future political favours. Speeches make up a large part of the revenue stream, with the Clintons earning hundreds of thousands per speech from the likes of big Wall Street banks including Goldman Sachs as revealed by WikiLeaks.

Clinton’s charity has confirmed that in 2012, Qatar donated US $1 million to the Clinton Foundation raising a question of ethics after Hillary promised that while she was serving as secretary of the state donations from foreign governments would no longer be accepted due to the potential influence on foreign policy.

It was also been revealed the Clinton charities utilised the devastating Haiti earthquake to implement disaster capitalism, funneling funds into Haiti under the pretense of aid but only for the funds to flow away from the Haitians desperately in need and instead to companies who had made previously large donations to the Clinton Foundation.

Then there is the $145 million ‘pay for play’ contributions made to the Clinton Foundation by shareholders of Canadian company Uranium One, a mining company with concessions in Kazakhstan and the US. Uranium One sought to sell these concessions to the Russians, but the deal had to be approved by a government committee due to the implications to national security.

In return for the contributions and the extra $500,000 Bill Clinton received in speaking fees from a Russian investment bank, the 20% purchase of US uranium assets by the Russians was approved, knowing this purchase would mean the production of more nuclear weapons against America’s own interests.

The Clinton Health Access Initiative has also had its share of controversy.

US Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn recently released a 71 page report which slammed CHAI’s “self-serving” philanthropy in Africa, after the charity was found distributing watered down HIV/AIDS medications to sick Africans.

According to the report, these cheaper drugs which were provided by Ranbaxy Laboratories “subjected patients to increased risks of morbidity and mortality”. Ranbaxy later was found guilty of selling badly made generic drugs and fined a record US$500 million.

If Hillary is elected president, she has committed to changing how the Clinton Foundation operates. Bill Clinton has said “The Foundation will accept contributions only from U.S. citizens, permanent residents, and U.S.-based independent foundations, whose names we will continue to make public on a quarterly basis. And we will change the official name from the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation to the Clinton Foundation. While I will continue to support the work of the Foundation, I will step down from the Board and will no longer raise funds for it.”

However, CHAI, which receives around 60% of the funds from the Clinton Foundation, has yet to decide whether it will also refuse foreign government donations if she was to win, and when asked for comment on CHAI the Clinton campaign spokesman declined.

There’s no doubt the Clinton charities have done some incredible work overseas through CHAI, but the manner in which these charities are utilised as vehicles for personal benefit can not be ignored. With strong financial ties to Wall Street, big pharmaceuticals and other large corporate sponsors, it’s clear the charities are being used as avenues to channel funds under the guise of philanthropy.

What is of great concern here in New Zealand is the level of taxpayer funded donations made to Hillary’s charity without public knowledge, and how quiet the mainstream media has been about it.

John Key and the National Party clearly have no issue using millions of taxpayer funds as bribes, revealed by the corrupt Saudi sheep deal, so it should be of no surprise to see the government fund a shady charity found to be acting only for ‘self serving’ interests.

We need to hold our government accountable for where taxpayer funds are being applied, especially when gifted to charities operated by corrupt American political figureheads.

Our country currently can not afford to be sending millions of dollars overseas. Instead of donating the remaining $6 million pledged to CHAI, we demand that MFAT reallocate the funds within New Zealand to help assist those struggling under our poverty and homelessness crisis.

For an excellent review of the Clinton Foundation, please have a read through the Washington Post’s feature ‘Inside the Clinton Donor Network’.

We also highly recommend watching the in-depth documentary ‘Clinton Cash’, which discusses the ‘pay for play’ model and resulting corruption which can be viewed here.

About The Author

Wake Up NZ is a team of dedicated truth-seekers from all over New Zealand. We are committed to disseminating information that the mainstream media fails to bring to you.

2 Responses

  1. Kim Falconer

    ok, so i’ve read the Washington Post article, & i’m still thinking “So what” ??? The Clinton’s are spectacularly good at raising money. Two thirds goes to their charity. The charity therefore has, & does, spend a huge amount of money on genuinely excellent causes. Is there supposed to be some sort of scandal here ~ just because it’s got Clinton’s name attached?? Whether it’s appropriate for the NZ govt to be donating to 1 specific charity over another may be a valid question. But many, many people have spent enormous effort over the past 35 yr.s flinging accusations at HRC (mostly “You’re woman, why don’t you sit down & be quiet?!”) & still haven’t managed to show corruption or ‘evil’ intent. Just because Fox News says it’s so a hundred times a week still doesn’t make it so…..

  2. Harmon Wilfred

    The CIA / Clinton Foundation Covert Money Laundering Connection

    Q: What do you get when you combine the Clinton/CIA global covert funding operation ( with the Clinton Cash Connection? (

    A: A politically legitimized billion-dollar global money laundering crime syndicate with the CIA as the enforcement arm.

    Hint: The Clinton Foundation was activated during the same year as the CIA/Clinton covert funding partnership became operational.

    I watched the Clinton Cash documentary and it became obvious to me that there is a direct relationship between the completion and funding of the first $15 billion tranche of the Clinton/CIA covert funding deal (“CCF”) in 1999 and the entire Clinton cash strategy. First of all, the Clinton Foundation was first created and funded in 1999, Clinton’s last year as President. It only makes sense that the Clinton’s were using these international deals to launder and invest the money from the CCF through his new found political and corporate syndicate. In the India example, the donor actually admitted that the money contributed to the Foundation was not his.
    The continuation of this process has been assured by the fact that there were originally 32 of these multi-billion dollar bank notes issued of which 11 were assigned to the CIA by 1999 through Central American countries and the balance were in process to be obtained. This was confirmed to me by a meeting in Colorado Springs with a member of the Rothschild family, Shamuel Emanual Abijah (code named ”The Principle”) who met with me in my Colorado Springs office and showed me the 32 notes in high resolution copy and revealed to me at the time that it was his family that caused the original notes to be issued in the 1960”s. Although his family was upset that the CIA had obtained possession of 11 of these notes (bearer bonds), as the bonds were already exposed to private trust intermediaries, they were compelled to cooperate and take part in the deals. The first bond transacted at a value of $15 billion in 1999 was the smallest of the 11 notes scheduled for transaction. I was told that due to the size and nature of each transaction they would initially limit them to one per year.
    It’s easy to see how the Clinton’s would become the brains of the laundering and investment strategy of this operation controlling all transactions through their Foundation and utilising their political clout and their long standing political/corporate syndicate oligarchs to funnel billions throughout the international scene in order to accomplish the covert and overt deals of the organization.
    Harmon Wilfred My email is:


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.