Clinton learned charitable giving from George Soros

Clinton Foundation corruption runs deep in access peddling, its management absorbing lessons by sitting at the feet of a master manipulator. For decades, George Soros set the standard for entrenching philanthropic agencies in governmental policy development overseas. After years of perfecting methods of infiltration into foreign politics, he turned his full attention onto his adopted country, one to which he emigrated with an eye to influence, undermine and engineer government for personal gain--under the guise of social justice, of course. Assisting the collapse of administrations in former Eastern Bloc countries, the Open Society Institute maneuvered itself into replacement educational, environmental and economic policy. All of it was done dangling grants of millions of dollars as the prize for following OSI guidelines in rebuilding schools, social structure and bureaucracies. In Romania alone, local press identified his back-stage involvement in deposing Nicolae Ceauçescu.¹ Destabilizing nations then moving into the shambles with handouts to the devastated communities, all with strings attached, has been the Soros modus operandi in more than 50 countries. This is part of the OSI mission:

"provide administrative, financial, and technical support to the Soros foundations and also operate OSI initiatives, which address specific issues on a regional or network-wide basis, and other independent programs..." and... "The goal of the Soros foundations network throughout the world is to transform closed societies into open ones and to protect and expand the values of existing open societies. The concept of open society is, at its most fundamental level, based on the recognition that people act on imperfect knowledge and that no one is in possession of the ultimate truth." (quotes from soros.org in 2007-08). [Note: Soros used Karl Popper's definition of open society that Popper later refuted as invalid.]

enter Soros' view of open society is a rebuke to all religious and political worldviews, especially the Christian worldview, which is echoed by the "community action" organizations that he supports from BlackLivesMatter to MoveOn.Org (a major Obama funder that illegally collected foreign money in 2008), Earthjustice and dozens more. These were outstanding "teachable" principles to the political-climbing nouveau influencers, the Clintons. Using any avenue necessary to shore up their financial requirements to make political inroads (not a cheap undertaking), the Clintons managed to increase their circle of 'friends' and clientele by tapping into the pool of international access seekers. Whereas Soros used hedge fund seed money sowed by mostly Arab investors (when the funds couldn't legally operate on American shores) to make inroads in Eastern Europe, Africa, South America, the Near East and the Orient, the Clintons developed a model of outsiders giving to their charity as an entrée to favorable U.S. political decision-making. Hillary and Bill Clinton's denial notwithstanding, their little system has garnered hundreds of millions of donation dollars that have translated into a minimum of philanthropic giving (from three to ten percent of total collections) outside of providing the Clintons lavish lifestyle. They were good students.

---

And much of the Clinton Foundation redirection of funds might have gone undetected but for the Benghazi investigation opening the can of worms that is the private server, now defunct and surgically scrubbed. Out of the miasma created by thousands and thousands of divulged emails, came a clear intent of the Clintons to use the foundation to launder the money they love and serve above charitable causes, their country and, most importantly, God. The method used by Soros and the Clintons of diverting funds through charitable organizations to influence governments is based in the belief that wealth is a restricted resource to be manipulated for their benefit. Steering the flow of currency and commodities is their prerogative, in their view, as acquisitions for personal disposal. This character trait of seeking money, and by association power, indicates a disregard for anything or anyone other than themselves. It demonstrates a lack of concern for national defense, on the part of the Clintons, and national identity, a bane to Soros' empire building. Both are interrelated as problematic for a sovereign United States let alone any other autonomous state. More importantly, they have elevated chasing wealth to a place above their country and God, which neither they nor Soros apparently recognize. This is problematic in that it has driven Hillary Clinton's purpose to the point that she and Bill installed a private server that was used indiscriminately for personal and government-related correspondence. By compromising national security for gain, Hillary has evidenced her contempt for state secrets, proving herself to be unreliable in its safeguarding.

---

Support Canada Free Press

---

From this, a question arises... if one is untrustworthy in handling a small thing, who will want to commit to their trust great secrets? You may recognize this as a paraphrase of Scripture:

Luke 16 ¹⁰ "One who is faithful in a very little is also faithful in much, and one who is dishonest in a very little is also dishonest in much. ¹¹ If then you have not been faithful in the unrighteous wealth, who will entrust to you the true riches? ¹² And if you have not been faithful in that which is another's, who will give you that which is your own? ¹³ No servant can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money." ESV

In the context of Hillary Clinton, "you cannot serve the nation and money." It's called a conflict of interest. By trying to use money to fulfill what only God can supply, it leaves a person wanting more of it. The blight of politics--the cycle of "making" money to buy power to "make" more money -- is empty. Trusting in wealth and not the Lord leaves a person in a precarious position of depending on something that can abandon you (Proverbs 23:5) when God will not. There's nothing wrong with wealth if it is used to honor God. (Proverbs 3:9-19) Placing someone in the Oval Office who has proven that she will always serve personal gain above the national security with which she has been entrusted, is, in the colloquial, inviting the fox into the henhouse. Timothy 6:10 is plain: "the love of money is the root of all evil." So why would we vote for a woman whose craven need for cash has made her willingly lay bare all her nation's weaknesses for every enemy to exploit?

1. News stories regarding Soros' involvement in the Romanian government overthrow of 1989 is referenced in Gold Baron, a fact-based novel by A. Dru Kristenev. Known personalities, companies and organizations along with their activities are covered (such as the extent of Soros and OSI's tentacles), their names changed at the time of writing to protect the author.