Charles Ortel : Clinton Foundadtion Update

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
It's the Opperman Report. Join digital forensic investigator and PI
at Opperman for an in depth discussion of conspiracy theories,
strategy of New World Order resistance, hi profile court cases
in the news, and interviews with expert guests and authors
on these topics and more. It's the Opperman Report, and

(00:30):
now here is Investigator at Opperman.

Speaker 2 (00:39):
Okay, welcome to the Opperman Report. I'm your host, Private
Investigator at Opperman, and the show is brought to you
by email revealer dot com. You can go to email
revealer dot com and get an autograph copy of my
book How to Become a Successful Investigator. Also too, if
you need any kind of PI work at email no

(01:00):
revealer dot com. Asset Searches locates infidelity investigations at email
review dot com. Okay, we have a returning guest here
and one of one of our most popular guests as
a matter of fact, Charles Ortel. You can find them
at Charles Ortel dot com and absolutely the foremost expert

(01:26):
on the Clinton Foundation Barnun. Charles will tell you there, yeah, sure, yeah,
there's no one doing it like you are.

Speaker 3 (01:34):
Right.

Speaker 4 (01:36):
Well, it just happened that I picked on this by
chance and saw it as a big topic early on,
and fortunately I'm retired so I could do what I
want to do. And you know, it struck me that
this was a major issue of concern across party lines.

Speaker 3 (01:52):
Nobody around the world or in America is in favor.

Speaker 4 (01:54):
Of using a charity to enrich yourself in fun political campaigns,
hijacking money that's meant to go to deserving victims around
the world instead using it for yourself.

Speaker 3 (02:04):
Nobody's in favor of that.

Speaker 2 (02:06):
Yeah, Just think, like, how low can you stoop? You know,
are You're going to take the money out of poor families,
earthquake victims, you know, and divert that money to your
own personal use. I don't think you can get any
lower than that. Before we get into the Clinton Foundation,
just remind the audience who is Charles Ortel?

Speaker 3 (02:25):
Well, thanks for asking.

Speaker 4 (02:27):
I am somebody who was fortunate to have parents who
care deeply bad education and being the eldest child, I
wanted to please my parents, so I liked doing well
in school and I've always enjoyed learning. I've had the
fortune to go, thanks to my parents, to excellent private
schools and not to some decent colleges and graduate school,
and then I had a nice career as an investment banker.

(02:47):
Retired early in two thousand and two at the age
of forty six, and was able then to you know,
take care of my kids. I had to gain custody
of them and then to really do whatever I want
I wanted to do, And after five years of doing that,
I got a little bored with not actually caring much
about the business world.

Speaker 3 (03:08):
So I began.

Speaker 4 (03:11):
Again by chance, aquating myself with how the market was
valuing companies, and through that work identified General Electric Corporation
as a company in two thousand and seven that I
felt was extremely vulnerable in the looming global crisis I
saw coming. So I started warning the world about it
and was pretty quickly proven right. So I got into

(03:32):
the business of commenting on large, complex frauds and problems,
and also geopolitical and national political issues and television, radio media,
print media, podcasting and stuff and that.

Speaker 3 (03:45):
Again.

Speaker 4 (03:46):
Along the way, somebody I got to know an investigative
world mentioned to me, you know, you seem to study
complex thing. Take a look at this Clinton.

Speaker 3 (03:54):
Nation, And I was just amazed.

Speaker 4 (03:57):
In March of twenty fifteen, when I quickly figured out
that a the Clinton Foundation was a gigantic fraud, and
B that Hillary Clinton most likely would be the nominee
and that she would lose. So I saw that I
had a fair amount of time. I saw that it
would be an issue of consequence. I realized early that

(04:18):
you know a lot of people that would would not
be happy with the conclusions, that I better make sure
my analysis was grounded, and I did it very systematically.
I put the stuff out on my site, Charles Retel
dot com, and I give the stuff away for free.
Lots and lots of people around the world have come
to study it. And finally, after winning, Donald Trump is

(04:42):
now in a position where he can unite America frankly,
expose the depth of this depravity and use this widening
investigation as a means to bring regulation of charities into
the twenty first such century. We have five trillion dollar
in the United States, supposedly around five trillion dollars or

(05:03):
so locked into these large charities, many of which are not.

Speaker 3 (05:08):
Really regulated properly.

Speaker 4 (05:10):
They don't have true independent audits, They don't disclose just
how much private benefit you know, whether that be capital
gains or cash or an advantage that these charities give
illegally to trustees, to executives, to significant donors on the
books without changing a lot. There's some very serious penalties

(05:30):
that could be applied to this pile, some portion of
this pile of five trillion in assets. And by exposing
the Clinton Foundation, and it's not just the Clinton Foundation,
it's many allied charities, all of us in the United
States might have an opportunity to cast a critical eye
on the charity land and ask these trustees, ask these
wealthy people, why is it that you enable allow this

(05:53):
Clinton Foundation and the related frauds to escalate to becoming
a global disgrace?

Speaker 3 (05:58):
Why did you do that?

Speaker 4 (06:00):
And you know, then turn on some of these foundations
that are the worst defenders and require them to pay
massive fines, penalties and interests to reduce our debt.

Speaker 3 (06:10):
So, I mean, it's a big opportunity for all of us.

Speaker 4 (06:12):
I actually, and since last time I've spoken to you
in your audience, I would say I've probably spent sixty
five percent of my time on left leaning stations and
thirty five percent on right leaning and that actually, you know,
this is one area, one bipartisan area of unity. Nobody
sensible is in favor of this charity for aud of

(06:32):
any kind, let alone of this kind.

Speaker 2 (06:35):
Well, who regulates this these charities?

Speaker 4 (06:39):
Well, the simple answer is nobody does properly. There are
too many charities in the United States for the existing
apparatus to actually be able to stay on top of
all of them. And the problem is especially acute when
you deal with charities like the Clinton Foundation that are
scattered all over the United States, that scattered around the world. Technically,

(07:00):
the technical answer to your question is the first port
of call would be the Arkansas Attorney General. Well, how
is the Arkansas Attorney General, which is a small state
with ain staff, How is that Arkansas Attorney General going
to be able to police a charity that's operating all
across Africa, Asia, Papula, and New Guinea, South America, you know, Australia,
you name it, with the small staff. The answer is

(07:23):
you're not going.

Speaker 3 (07:23):
To be able to do it.

Speaker 4 (07:24):
And that's before considering you know, how much influence Clinton
loyalists may have. Even though Republicans control the state now
in terms of elected offices, there are a lot of
Clinton loyalists in the machinery scattered across Arkansas. So how
do you know, it's very difficult to actually make progress.
And that's why when I when I looked at this,

(07:46):
you know, I approached the Arkansas Attorney General in August
of twenty fifteen, and though that person is a Republican,
I got nothing. So when I saw that it was
going to be that difficult to move things along, it said,
you know, the right way to do this is to
reach out around the world to the principal countries in
which either the Clinton Foundation operates or solicits or both,

(08:09):
and using my contacts in each of these countries, begin
to educate them as to the fraud, the nature of
the fraud, and then to put this in a position
where people around the world can start asking, you know,
why are so many governments and big private foundations, why
were they willing to tolerate this fraud? And why have

(08:29):
so few Why have none of the attorney's general, you know,
across this country, whether the Republican or Democrat, why have
none of them been moved to go against the Clinton
Foundation and apply the leverage that exists under the laws
under these law, under our tax laws, federal and state
tax laws. When the IRS flips the switch, when an individual,

(08:49):
state finance department switches moves the switch to the go position.
You have enormous leverage against a charity. A charity is
not allowed to engage in any activity other than it's authorized,
strictly authorized, specifically authorized purposes. If you raise money as
a charity for one purpose building a presidential park and

(09:12):
library in Little Rock, but instead use it even for
a good purpose curing cancer, fighting aids, you name it,
that's illegal. That's called diversion. You're not allowed to do that.
And you're certainly not allowed to say that you're raising
money for earthquake victims and instead use the money for
your political campaigns, or for your mansions, or for your
travel expenses or your mistresses. You're not allowed to do
any of that. And you're definitely not allowed to have

(09:35):
a long record, now more than twenty years. We're supposed
to produce independent audits, strictly performed, truly independent audits by
competent accounting firms. There has never been an audit that
passes the muster of that I see out there generally
accepted accounting principles in the United States of America, which
is the standard. There's never been an audit a legally

(09:56):
compliant audit of the Clinton Foundation have been fake audit,
So I say this is a fake charity. There have
been fake investigations into this fake charity up until twenty seventeen,
and it's time for the American people to understand the
degree to which the Clintons and perhaps even the Bushes
may have co opted the process of bringing this fraudulent

(10:19):
enterprise as criminal enterprise to heal.

Speaker 2 (10:23):
Just recently was announced that the Sessions has opened up
a Department of Justice investigation. Now have they contacted you
and said it and want to bring you in? You'd
think what more of an expert could they want?

Speaker 4 (10:35):
Well, so the way I understand this sort of stuff works,
and it's really for the protection of each of us
in America. Here, when the Department Justice and the FBI
train their significant resources on a potential case, they remember
that all Americans are innocent until proven guilty, So they're
often loath to involve people who are not members of

(10:56):
the government process in an investigation. So it's not surprising
I would not have been and contacted directly by anybody.
I imagine that could change, but as of this moment,
I've had no direct contact with any member of uh
you know, of American government, and some indirect contact with
members of numerous foreign governments.

Speaker 2 (11:18):
You mentioned earlier that this was a gigantic fraud. In
all of your examination of other charities and businesses, like
you said, ge and stuff like that, have you ever
seen anything like this?

Speaker 3 (11:28):
Never?

Speaker 4 (11:29):
Because you see what you have here is it's it's
really sad in many ways. What you have here is
a business model for fraud and quotes a business model
for fraud. If you and I have ad Opperaman and
Charles Rtel, we create the O two charity. Two o's
I guess or two whatever, yeah, double exactly, double O

(11:51):
seven or whatever. And I'm actually, I'm actually it's dropping
names a little bit. But I do know Sean Connery,
so ask him to be the the honorary chairman. But anyway,
and we just say, what we're going to do is
something wonderful. You know, typically you put a starving kid
on the cover of charity and you'll get money. You know,
I'm being very cynical here, But if we were to
allege that we were going to pursue some purpose, go

(12:13):
through the formalities, the nominal formalities of filling out paperwork,
but then ensure that our directors were all beholden to us,
that our accountants were not ever actually going to check
the books, but would say they were going to do it.
There's a potential to raise tremendous amounts of money. Americans
each year, roughly speaking, give two hundred billion dollars a

(12:35):
year to charity.

Speaker 3 (12:36):
So there's and.

Speaker 4 (12:37):
With the PayPal and the Internet, it's very easy to
create an argument for you know, getting money, and if
you're prepared to break the rules, and moreover, if you're
prepared to obstruct justice, which are the two counts that
Bill Clinton I believe was he was never convicted, but
he was indicted. The impeachment is akin to indictment for

(12:58):
obstructing justice and lying under oath. Those are the two
counts during that famous matter in nineteen ninety eight. So
if you're prepared to make a career of that, and
you're a global celebrity like the Clintons and the people
they attract, and you also have as a benefit a
wife who is going to maybe one day run for
president and possibly win, you have an argument to attract

(13:20):
a lot of money. And the total declared amount of
money in the Clinton Foundation books, such as they are,
is about two billion dollars. But that's nothing compared to
the amount of money that may have gone actually towards
Clinton charities and towards charities affiliated to the Clinton So
one small example, it's not that small, but one reasonably
small example is the Interim Haiti Relief Committee, which no

(13:45):
one really knows how much money because Bill Clinton's co
chairman of it and has refused to allow for any
real accounting. But that thing got anywhere from ten to
fourteen billion, depending on who you'll listen to. You got
the Global Fund, which is I would argue lied charity
in that it was close coordination among Bill Clinton and

(14:05):
a disgraced fellon rajatque Gupta who became chairman of the
Global Fund, and McKenzie and another operation. So that thing
is I think at fifty or sixty billion dollar fraud.
And then you can go down around a lot of
other charitable activities, and then what you have to do
is you have to think about all the money that
donors to the Clinton foundations may have made. And there

(14:27):
are many projects that were concocted in what I call
the Clinton Grifters initiative. They call it the Clinton Global Initiative, which.

Speaker 3 (14:37):
Was never a charity.

Speaker 4 (14:38):
It was a closed shop party here in New York
principally some meetings elsewhere where. You know, for a modest
ticket if you actually paid it around twenty thousand bucks,
you could get in a room with existing and former
world leaders and titans of business in the charity land,
and you could brag about what you might do in
future while in practice putting together deals to do telecom

(14:59):
the and energy deals and banking deals around the world,
all you know, safely cloistered behind the public view in
this party environment, and that is strictly forbidden. You are
not allowed to engage in business development activities in the
guise of charity. And if you do create games, you're

(15:20):
supposed to report them on your charitable tax forms, which
they've never done.

Speaker 2 (15:24):
Yeah, and like you said, that's super cheap access man,
twenty thousand dollars to avail those with these kind of characters, right, Yeah,
that's that's incredible. That's a bargain. Now what did you
find out about that? Because you mentioned that the Bushes
too have their own shnaggings going on. That whole business
about the tiny houses for Haiti. I just started recently

(15:45):
on American greed and they had a whole series about it,
and Jeb Bush was involved, and that Wesley Clark, what
do you know about that?

Speaker 4 (15:56):
You're talking there about Inavida Corporation. So interview to Homes,
let me take it back a little bit, because it
goes it starts before then. So without getting into you know,
what may have happened in Mana and Arkansas and all
that stuff, leaving that aside, right.

Speaker 2 (16:10):
Which happened happened?

Speaker 4 (16:15):
Yeah, I'll just say because that's ancient history, right, but
just picking it up. You know, the anominalies that I
see start on January twentieth, two thousand and one, when
George W. Bush is sworn into office. That same early
that morning or late the previous night, Bill Clinton pardoned
Mark Rich and his business partner I think Pinches or

(16:38):
pink as Green, and these people were just outrageous people
who should never have been pardoned, but nonetheless he did.
And there was an immediate human you know, Hugh and Cry,
even Jimmy Carter was moving and many Democrats were moved
to just deplore what the president had done. And an
FBI investigation opened up by February of two thousand and one,

(17:00):
alongside an investigation in the Southern District in New York
and maybe other districts into this Clinton Foundation, into the
effect that may have had been used as a front
as a money launder basically and possibly for public corruption.
So the records of that thing are actually some of
the records are on file and what is called the

(17:21):
FBI vault. There's the William J. Clinton Foundation. I call
them dumps or releases. There's two releases totally about six
hundred plus pages that show quite you know, a lot
of activity initially in two thousand and one. And then
James Comy takes over as US Attorney for the Southern
District of New York early in two thousand and two.

(17:43):
And though the public record I see that they could
have had access to shows very clearly that the Clinton
Foundation was an escalating fraud from two thousand and two
four to two thousand and four. For some strange reason, Camy,
who with them is promoted to the position now held
by Rosenstein of Deputy Attorney General and Muller who began

(18:04):
head to be head of the FBI on the fourth
of September two thousand and one. Somehow these gentlemen could
not find these obvious, escalating frauds, including that by two thousand.
You know, and I've been involved personally and then you
know professionally in projects that involve construction. If you if

(18:24):
you don't have tight controls, you can invent, you can
hide a lot of money in a fake construction cost estimate.

Speaker 3 (18:32):
Right.

Speaker 4 (18:33):
If you get a crooked team involved and you want
to just make money disappear, you overstate the value of
the project. And I think that's what happened in the
Clinton Foundation, and the immense overstatement actually happened as the
Clinton Foundation complex was completed and as documents were transferred

(18:53):
from the National Archives into the Clinton Foundation. So you
go into your two thousand and four when this investigation
and when there was a grand jury open, and when
in theory the attorneys were trying to win indictments. Somehow
they couldn't get a conviction together, an indictment and conviction
together for a fraud that was massive right as this

(19:15):
thing opened on the eighteenth of November two thousand and four.
That's very strange. So it makes me wondering, you know,
what leverage might the Clintons have had on the on
the bushes, and you know, to figure all that out,
I imagine perhaps the Clintons might have come through files
while they were in the White House. We know that
they secured a whole bunch of FBI files and while

(19:39):
Bill was president.

Speaker 3 (19:40):
We don't know whether those are all the files, whether there.

Speaker 4 (19:43):
Were additional files that were gotten, whether it's additional information
was got. We don't know what leverage the Clinton's had
on the Bushes. But it's very suspicious to me that,
you know, especially in that early period, when the audits,
the supposed that audits the Clinton Foundation, they're available, but
they're not on the Clinton Foundation website, and you look
at them as I have. I've gotten them from Massachusetts

(20:05):
and California and New York. They state flatly that the
councilor prepared not in accordance with the US accounting principles.

Speaker 3 (20:13):
You're not allowed to do that. There's just no way
you can do that, and yet they did it.

Speaker 4 (20:19):
And so it's very surprising that President Bush's Justice Department
and the IRS did not make an issue of it
and stopped this fraud all the way back in two
thousand and four. So moving along the fraud, escalated, became
more international, became more diabolical in that it was you know,
it moved into this area of in theory fighting HIV AIDS.
And I've talked a little bit, I think with you

(20:41):
about that before. Since the last time we talked, experts
have helped me out to understand it that their record
in theory fighting HIV AIDS is so disgusting that the
many celebrities have gone to these gallows of the Elton
Johns of this world and the Hollywood people, they should
be ashamed of themselves. There were never any coulds on
this operation. It was never validly authorized. It's extremely dangerous

(21:05):
to distribute HIV AIDS medicine that hasn't been tested properly
in countries such as Haiti and elsewhere.

Speaker 3 (21:11):
In Africa and Asian around the world that.

Speaker 4 (21:13):
Are poor because you know, unlike the United States, where
treatment costs and medical costs are like twenty percent of
the total costs. That's because we have an infrastructure. We
have roads, we have electricity, we have clean water, we
have hospitals and doctors. They don't have that stuff in
many of these places, and so poor people who are
you know, not nourished well thin, little kids and other

(21:35):
people scattered throughout remote parts of these countries can test
positive for HIV and actually not have HIV. And if
you give them medicine intended to fight HIV and they
don't really have it, you can kill them. And what's
worse is there was a drug company called ron Boxy Rinbaxy,

(21:55):
with which the Clinton Foundation team on October twenty seventh,
or they are about two and three now. That was
an illegal arrange when it was a business development arrangement.
The Clinton Foundation was not authorized in two thousand and
three to fight HIVAS by anybody, and it certainly wasn't
authorized to enter into an agreement with a drug company
to try to promote the sale of drugs.

Speaker 3 (22:15):
You can't do that as a charity. But that's what
they did.

Speaker 4 (22:18):
And then by two thousand and four an investigation started
opening and culminated nine years later in twenty thirteen with
run Boxy paying a five hundred million dollars fine and
pleading guilty to distributing adultterated drugs, not SIP the HIV
AIDS drugs, but all kinds of drugs, and some of
these drugs more than likely ended up being distributed through

(22:42):
the Clinton Foundation in quotes good offices. Now that's disgusting
and deplorable. So what you're talking about is by two
thousand and nine, in around March or April two thousand
and nine, Bill Clinton was designated especially you and Envoy Tahiti.
He had had long standing ties that country and there
have been longstanding problems in that country. Around the same time,

(23:04):
a company called Innovita Homes began to argue that it
could create these these homes that would be very useful
in Haiti. Now the problem is, I think the promoter
was the man I forget his first name, but his
last name I think was Asorio, and he was a
clever fraudster who's now I think still in prison. Who
man it, who thought it through and said, you know,

(23:25):
the way to make these deals work is you get
you get the uniparty team together, you get a Bush,
and you get a Clinton. So they Jeb Bush was
temporarily either an advisory director or somehow involved, Wesley Clark
was involved, and Hillary I think was still in the
State Department by the time this project goal came together.

(23:46):
And I want to say they organized some sort of
special I forget whether it was opic OPI C or
some kind of you know US or multilateral financing was
arranged for this company. And it turned out the company
he was a fiction.

Speaker 3 (24:01):
That the guy was.

Speaker 4 (24:02):
Taking the money and setting it up his nose, paying
for a happy lifestyle, and he went to prison for fraud.
And that I joke about this. My father is very
much alive, nuclear physicist, and he is a scientist. I
am not, but I joke that I have created Ortell's
first law, and Ortell's first law and probably only law

(24:22):
is you take anything connected to the Clintons, you put
it in quotes.

Speaker 3 (24:26):
So you take a Storio owned.

Speaker 4 (24:27):
Quotes or interview the homes and quotes, and then you
put fraud next to it, and you put that into Google,
and you will always be amused. You will always find
something of interest.

Speaker 3 (24:37):
You do that.

Speaker 2 (24:38):
True. Yeah, and Obama was involved in that too, even
while he was a senator in Chicago. He somehow attended
a fundraiser for that that Haitian company with the tiny houses.

Speaker 3 (24:50):
Did he really? I didn't know about that.

Speaker 2 (24:51):
Yeah, Well they made the same names pop up everywhere.

Speaker 3 (24:55):
You know.

Speaker 2 (24:56):
Now, since this is all so obvious now, right, it's
so right now, And obviously there's a lot of political
pull and corruption going on. But Sessions. If Sessions now
does not uncover this and get a conviction, what would that.

Speaker 4 (25:10):
Tell you, Well, it's taken a while to get it
to the place that it's in. I think what we
have now is we've gone through a long period of
what I would call fake investigations. But with the announcement
that the FBI specifically and the Department just as specifically
are looking not simply an email matters and public corruption

(25:31):
and pay for play, but add into the false tax filings.
With that announcement, with the confirmation by the IRS that
they've been looking at this since July twenty sixteen, with
the scrutiny of Congress and the scrutiny of Donald Trump himself,
and with the growing scrutiny of foreign governments, they are

(25:52):
now boxed. There's no way. I have an article coming
out imminently on the subject explaining it depth. But the
short version is that with this announcement that the FBI
is investigating specifically improper tax filings, the way it works,
accountants would have to notice that accountants for the Clinton Foundation,
all of its allied charities, and there are many allied

(26:14):
charities and the most importantly accountants for donors to the
private foundations like the Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the
Johnson Foundation, other big, well known, well run foundations. When
they see that the irs the Justice, the FBI investigation,
you cannot just say, oh yeah, let's give more money

(26:35):
to the Clinton Foundation. And you can't say, well, you know,
last year we gave him ten million bucks that we
shouldn't ask for our money back. The way the rules
are written, you've got to ask for your money back
if you're a private foundation. You become aware that the
Clinton Foundations operated outside compliance.

Speaker 3 (26:51):
With the law.

Speaker 4 (26:52):
And the further wrinkle is that normally what is called
a private foundation, you know, think of the Gates Foundation.
Cannot donate money to something saying it's a public charity.
You know, the Clinton Faundy is supposed to be operated
for the benefit of the general public. You can't say,
last year I gave ten million of the Clinton Foundation
because I thought it was a public charity and then

(27:14):
failed to know that it couldn't possibly be deemed to
public charity. Because on November two, twenty thirteen, decision was
made to change the bylaws of the Clinton Foundation, hide
it from the general public and install the Clinton family
and control of the Clinton Foundation. You can't do that
as a public charity. You can't have a public charity

(27:35):
run by one family. But that's what they did do,
and somebody must have known that was a mistake, so
they tried to hide it. But I and others found it,
and we're exposing it now. So you're in a place
where the IRS, the Justice Department, they have to follow
the trail. Finally, they moreover, they have to ask them spells,

(27:55):
Why didn't the IRS catch this stuff a long time ago?
Who has been obstructing this process of justice here in
the IRS, in the Department Justice, in the FBI, who's
been walking slow? Who's been fighting this? On top of that,
you have all these foreign governments who are now going
to be shamed into You have the largest donor to
the Clinton Foundation. You know, they divide it into classes,

(28:17):
and they say the biggest group is twenty five million.
In up, the largest donor has given more than six
hundred million dollars to the Clinton Foundation. And that's an
entity out of Switzerland, principally funded by donations from the
government of France. So you know, government of France has
got to ask itself why since two thousand and six
has this unit ad given more than six hundred million

(28:38):
dollars in theory to fight HIV eights predominantly among children.
It's very difficult for children to get HIV. Generally you
get it through drug use and intervenous blood transmission or
sexual activity. It's kind of you know, it's unusual at
age two to get HIV AIDS. It can happen that

(28:59):
you get it through the mother, but it's very unusual
in young children who don't have it at birth together.
So you know, somebody needs to take a look, particularly
in France, and I hope people in France and government
and outside government journals are beginning to look at it.
In other countries like the United Kingdom, which is through
United given hundreds of millions and actually sign up a
point to commit to a billion pounds to UNITATE, of

(29:23):
which a majority in the early years was going to
the Clinton Foundation AIDS unit, which was never legally organized
or operated. Norway, Australia, Korea, Spain, Sweden, multiple governments have
given a lot of money to this fraud and the
people in their countries should be standing up and saying, hey,
wait a minute, and then we turned our attention to

(29:45):
I believe you're in California.

Speaker 3 (29:47):
Are you no?

Speaker 2 (29:47):
In Nevada?

Speaker 4 (29:48):
Nevada A right, so you're close to the good sense
not to be in California. Well, speaking in about California,
you know, California is a very important state when it
comes to raising money for charities, and the laws encount
When you have a state that has rich people and
high income people, typically the laws are tougher.

Speaker 3 (30:06):
On soliciting money for charities.

Speaker 4 (30:08):
This foundation has been a gross violation of the law
in California, yet you know, for years and yet and
has been actively raising money in multiple fundraisers in California,
yet your Attorney general in California has never seen fit
to do anything about it.

Speaker 3 (30:25):
And that man's name, I believe now.

Speaker 4 (30:27):
Is Xavier Visarah, and he also has got some issues
because he was the guy who apparently was involved in
that Awa scandal where sensitive information and computers and devices
were apparently managed by highly suspicious people under expensive contracts
with nobody seeming to check anything, and the Sarah es centrally.

Speaker 3 (30:49):
Involved in it.

Speaker 4 (30:50):
So this is a many tentacled scandal and I think
people across the political spectrum, whether you're right leaning or
left leaning or agnostic about politics, we all care a
lot that you know, money is intended for the most
medium among us get used for their proper intended purposes
and not to feather bed drifters.

Speaker 2 (31:13):
I'm curious because you mentioned the government of France gave
six hundred million. Have you found any indications of anything
suspicious going on in France of what they may have
benefited from this?

Speaker 3 (31:24):
Sure? Sure, I mean so in Europe.

Speaker 4 (31:28):
In Europe, the way things work is that presidential contests
are not they don't go on as long, and they're
typically they're funded by the public and their limits on
how much money can be spent. So I'm not saying
that precisely this happened in France. But my suspicion is
that if you can convince if you're crooked, and you
can convince the treasury to send money to something that

(31:50):
sounds good on paper but is not actually checked, then
that's something. In this case, Unit daid could arrange for
money to go to something like the Clinton found AI
not regulated at all, and then the Clinton Foundation could
brain for money to be wrapped to you to help
you fund your campaign. That's what I'd be looking for

(32:11):
our revenge government.

Speaker 2 (32:14):
Oh my god, Charles Ortel. We'll be right back after
these messages with more of Charles Ortel Charles Ortel dot com.
Fascinating stuff, so detailed and so with such expertise. Man,
we can't get enough. We'll right back after stress. And
now a word from our sponsors. Archival Revival, the Christian

(32:37):
Film Archive is currently paying for vintage Christian films. They
are dedicated to preserving and restoring classic Christian films and media.
So if you have original prints, negatives, or other film
elements of classic Christian films, or you have audio recording
masters for classic Christian record albums, they want to buy
them from you. So email Archival dot Revival at gmail

(33:02):
dot com and they're going to make you an offer.
Archival Revival wants to preserve these classic Christian films so
that they continue saving people for years, these films that
brought people to salvation. They want to continue that. Their
staff has decades of experience in handling and preserving on
film elements, utilize the very best climate control film storage
facilities around the world. Contact them today at Archival dot

(33:24):
Revival at gmail dot com. If there's someone you know
has these prints, negatives, recording masters, or other materials from
vintage Christian films, you can check out their blog at
Archival Revival dot blogspot dot com. Now, just so you understand,
Archival Revival wants to pay you for these films. So
you can look in your church attict in the church basement.

(33:46):
If you have a friend who runs a Christian youth ministry,
these youth vacation Bible study camp, they have these old
films and those big metal containers sixteen milimeter and thirty
five millimeters. Archival Revival wants to buy them from you.
So this is a answer that actually wants to give
you money, and all we have to do is contact them,
tell them what you have. If you're in the UK,
or Island or Africa with these films are all over

(34:09):
the world and they're gathering dust and they're going to
deteriorate if they don't get into the hands of Archival Revival.
So that's Archival dot Revival at gmail dot com, or
the blog spot is Archival Revival dot blogspot dot com.
Don't forget the show is brought to you by pscoco
dot com. Phoebe Side is an independent curator with the

(34:31):
Cocoa Exchange. The Coco Exchange is formerly known as Dove
Chocolate Discoveries and they make the finest, silky smooth chocolate
because the products start with the best cocoa beans, which
are tested for quality and flavor by expert technicians. The
Cocoa Exchange offers not just premium chocolates, but anything from
sauces and spices, to brownieancake mixes, and even coffee and

(34:52):
martini mixes. If you wish to treat yourself or someone
you love to a sweet and tasty gift, then the
Cocoa Exchange is the brand for you. So you go
to pscoco dot com. You click on the shop now button.
You can see all their beautiful chocolates. You can order
it right now tonight, it could be in your mailbox
in a couple of days. Or if you want to
get into the chocolate business, you want to be a
chocolate tier just like Phoebe Sod, click the contact us

(35:13):
button and you can learn how to get your own website,
go into the cocoa chocolate business and sell chocolate and
make a little bit of money there. Remember all these
shows on Awake are brought to you by email revealer
dot com. You can go to email revealer dot com
and get a copy of my book How to Become
a Successful Private Investigator. But you also do all kinds
of different services for you at an online and dating

(35:33):
service investigations called an online infidelity investigation, and that's where
you give us your husband or your boyfriend your girlfriend's
email address, and we trace it back to their online
dating websites, and we return a list of all the
dating sites that that email is registered to. We can
expand our night investigation and trace it back to porn sites,
esports service sites, swinger sites, gambling websites, and even prescription

(35:53):
drug websites if you think your ex husband or something
is addicted to prescription medication or involved in an extreme
online pornography addiction. But we can produce a report for
you can use in court adoption investigations. If you want
to locate your birth parents so you or your birth
child he gave away for adoption, we can do adoption
investigations for you. Asset searches for you locate bank accounts,

(36:14):
hidden assets, hidden properties, hidden income, all different kinds of
services in the asset search investigation email tracing. If you
need to locate or identify somebody from just an email address,
we can do an email trace investigation for you in
all kinds of digital forensics, computer and cell phone digital forensics,
where we can recover deleted content from an email or
a hard drive and produce a report for you that

(36:36):
you can use in court. That's email Revealer dot com,
or you can contact me at Oppermaninvestigations at gmail dot com.
Welcome back to the Opperman Report. I'm your host, private
investigator at Opperman. We're joined here today by Charles Ortel

(37:01):
his website Charles Ortel dot com. As a bunch of
new articles just came out recently, interviewed by Sputnik and
also by Zero Hedge and wrote an article for that.
Charles the day after. In fact, it was the day
before when they announced that the DOJ was investigating the
Clinton Foundation. The day before there was a fire. The

(37:23):
Clinton's had a fire. Now, you know, if this was
like a mom and pop type operation, right away, you'd say, oh, hey,
what's going on here? Could they possibly claim that the
records were destroyed and something like that?

Speaker 3 (37:38):
That doesn't help you.

Speaker 4 (37:39):
So they're used to I think operating in politics and
in business, whether it's either political motives or for profit motives.
The way I understand, and I'm not a lawyer, but
the way I understand laws pretending to charity to operate,
there is no need to prove intent in fraud in

(38:01):
charity fraud, and there's no need to prove actual harm.
All you have to show is that the books and
records that are in the public domain are false and
materially misleading, and that simultaneously, given charity or people working
around the charity was out raising money, trying to raise money,
soliciting money, not collecting it, soliciting it. That's proven, That's

(38:22):
easily proven. The books and records of the Clinton Foundation
are complete shambles, and they admit they boast about their
continually raising money. And so that's why I wrote an
article has kicked this off in March of twenty fifteen,
writing an article that has now I think over eighty
two thousand shares, which is a lot called with so
many red flags. Why isn't the Clinton Why isn't the

(38:43):
IRS auditing the Clinton Foundation?

Speaker 3 (38:45):
Okay, so I saw this.

Speaker 4 (38:47):
I just couldn't believe that nobody's auditing it, and I
think we'll get to the bottom of why nobody was auditing.
I think we're going to find out that in addition
to Lois Lerner, who certainly seems to me to be
crooked as hell, there are other crooks in the IRA,
and they probably did what they could to stop any
real investigation into this fraud. So you don't, as I say,

(39:11):
this is a special animal, and it's actually it's a
reverse case when the IRS. When an attorney general in
the state decides to go after a charity, what they do.
They could walk in with no notice and say, produce
your books and records demonstrating to us that you have
been you were organized, the date you were organized, and
operated continuously since in compliance with all laws.

Speaker 3 (39:33):
You prove that to us. We don't have to ask questions.
You prove it to us.

Speaker 4 (39:37):
And along the way, in all these filings in this
many state filings that the Clinton Foundation has made, the
RS filings, the foreign filings, most of these in the US,
and I think most of them internationally are all made
under penalties of perjury. They're signed, they're transmitted, many of
these documents either using the mail or using the internet,
so they're all kinds of federal crimes and state crime

(40:00):
involved here.

Speaker 3 (40:01):
And you can't say that.

Speaker 4 (40:04):
You burned your records and you shouldn't, you know, have
records for the foundation in an undeclared office of the
Clinton town there's no form in New York State, for example,
declares the Chappaqua address as you know, the place where
they're housing Clinton Foundation records.

Speaker 3 (40:21):
So the fire is not going to help you very much.

Speaker 2 (40:25):
Is there any chance that they could do jail time
over this, Well.

Speaker 4 (40:29):
Let's take the poor case of Karin Brown. Karin Brown
is a seventy one year old lady who served in
Congress for I think twenty four years. She was running
for they had redistricted her area. She's a Democrat, she's
African American. And in three days, I believe, after James
Comey's July fifth, whatever you want to call it, is

(40:52):
his message from the Federal Bureau of Exoneration that they
weren't going to go after Hillary Clinton for email related problems.

Speaker 3 (41:00):
Three days after that.

Speaker 4 (41:01):
The US attorney I think in the Jacksonville area of
Florida indicted Krin Brown over an eight hundred thousand dollars
charity fraud that had lasted some twenty years or so.
She was one of the people involved in operating that thing.
Their justice moved very swiftly in her case.

Speaker 3 (41:17):
She was convicted. She originally faced three hundred and fifty
years in prison for eight hundred.

Speaker 4 (41:22):
Thousand dollars charity fraud, and they reduced the sentence to
five years.

Speaker 3 (41:28):
There's a fifty page.

Speaker 4 (41:29):
Sentence in memo that explains why they took such a
harsh view of it. You know, because you're not supposed
to be using a charity for personal.

Speaker 3 (41:36):
Gain and political expenses.

Speaker 4 (41:38):
When you do that, and when you're a serious person,
you're a longtime member of Congress, the law lands on
you heard to make an example. Well, she said, you know,
in filings back and forth, she said, Hey, I'm seventy one.
You know, it's tough for me to go to prison.
Let me at least appeal this. I want to appeal it,
you know, before I report to prison. They said, you
know what, you're not a Clinton report to prison on

(41:59):
January twenty ninth, twenty eighteen, which is what she's slated
to do. So, you know, one of the things that really,
as they say in England, chooses me off is when
you see a law applied one way because somebody's African
American and another way because they're white.

Speaker 3 (42:17):
I don't think that's right.

Speaker 4 (42:18):
And I say that as somebody who's you know, comes
out of the conservative background. I'm certainly not a progressive
Democrat or like that. So when you see the laws
being applied this way to the benefit of somebody who
you had the nerve of saying he was the first
African American president, Bill Clinton, and now Hillary Clinton, you

(42:38):
know who panders to blacks. You know, it's just it's
just not right. And I think, you know, we need
to see I don't think Corin Brown should be pardoned,
and I know from what I see that the just
in the public domain, if the offense is committed. The
long standing pattern and practice of egregious fraud and personal

(42:58):
enrichment and using these charities as arguments to fund the
political causes and campaigns to the Clintons is so outrageous
that an example needs to be set here. And if
that example involves jail time, so be it. You know,
the former presidents and other places around the world are
in jail. You know, it's not something that we should
be proud of. That one of our former presidents and

(43:19):
aspiring presidents, and maybe the daughter and other people might
end up in jail. But on the other hand, you know,
this would send quite a message to the swamp that,
you know, if you're going to be engaged and not
for profit activities, they.

Speaker 3 (43:32):
Better be not for profit.

Speaker 4 (43:33):
There's no such thing as you know, a venture philanthropy,
which I've heard somebody talking about. There's no such thing
as you know, running roughshot all over the foundation because
you happen to have your name in it but not
following any of the state, federal, or foreign laws. You're
not allowed to do that. And you know, maybe it
is time for this type of reckoning. I don't think,

(43:53):
you know, people would like to say, well, this is
all about, you know, political retribution. First of all, I
go back to my opening premise. I think nobody in America,
when they think about it, is in favor of charity fraud.
I don't think Donald Trump's administration would be punishing what
we will end up knowing about this fraud because it
happened to be involving mostly Democrats. Bear in mind some

(44:17):
of the minor elements the affiliates were tied in. For one,
with the George W. Bush Foundation, the Haiti effort, and
the other with the George H. W. Bush Foundation, the
Katrina effort. So it's not simply, you know, the Clinton
piece of it, in financial terms is far bigger than
whatever may happen to touch the Bush side. But charity

(44:38):
fraud is charity fraud. And when you perpetrate one involving
eight hundred thousand dollars in the case of Kriyn Brown,
because your last name isn't Clinton or Bush, you got
to federal prison.

Speaker 3 (44:47):
Now does that seem fair?

Speaker 2 (44:50):
It would be fair if they had to sell next
to her, you know. And also the Bushes as well too.
Now what about real quick, because we weren't out of
time that about fifteen minutes left Jeffrey Epstein his involvement
in creating the Clinton Foundation. I have the twenty four
page letter where his attorney, Jerry Leftcoord says that he
was involved.

Speaker 4 (45:08):
What do you know, Well, first of all, I love
for you to email me offline that don't use my email.
Please email that to me because I've been trying to
get that letter. But yeah, that I think he's taking
credit there. In two thousand and I want to say
two starting in two thousand and two, Jeffrey Episteine lent
his plane to the Clinton entourage to fly around the world.

Speaker 3 (45:30):
And explore this idea of fighting HIV AIDS.

Speaker 4 (45:33):
I think he also may have been involved with the
Clinton Grifters initiative, Clinton Global Initiative. But Jeffrey Epstein takes
some nerve when you're facing sentencing to have your lawyer
inflate your credentials and think that no one's ever going
to check. Jeffrey Epstein is not named as a trustee,
a director. I don't believe these names is a significant dunner.

(45:55):
I may have that wrong, but he is certainly not
in any paperwork suggesting he had a prominent role in
the administration, the founding of the administration, operation of the
Clinton charities. On the other hand, it is known from
the fight logs that Bill Clinton did travel and maybe
other Clintons did travel on the plane to various places.

Speaker 3 (46:15):
And you know that whole paperwork.

Speaker 4 (46:16):
Of donating the use of your plane to a foundation.
When you do that, there's supposed to be a record
made of how somebody valued how much that donation. It's
a non cash donation, how do you value that? And
I see no such records in the Clinton Foundation filings.
I don't know whether Epstein would have done it on
his personal tax filings, whether he has a foundation, but yeah,

(46:38):
I mean, and what kind of person you know would
want to spend too much time associating with Jeffrey Epstein.
I just happened to be reading James Patterson's excellent book
Filthy Rich, which gets into the timeline. Says, I'm looking
at it right now. It gets into the timeline. A
lot of these shenanigans were happening when the Clinton Foundation
was operating flagrantly outside the law.

Speaker 2 (47:00):
Fascinating.

Speaker 3 (47:01):
Now.

Speaker 2 (47:02):
You mentioned earlier too that the Clinton Foundation had no
problems attracting money wall especially while Hillary was a State
department a Secretary of State. And now what about today,
now that she's not in power, are they still raking
in that money at the same volume they were back then.

Speaker 4 (47:18):
Well, you have no way of knowing, because the way
it works is that the Clinton Foundation and all foundations
have until generally your you're end of December thirty one,
you have until November fifteenth, twenty eighteen, to supply information
concerning the first year twenty seventeen, during which the Clintons
would have suffered the most following her loss in the

(47:40):
presidential So we don't. We simply just don't know, gotcha.
And in fact we've never known because the thing has
never been audited. Now, I don't know if I mentioned
that under New York law, you're going to have to
file a report explaining whether you're worried about this FBI
IRIS investigation within days. So it'll be interesting to see

(48:02):
whether they decide to follow New York law in each
of the Clinton charities, not simply the main one or not.
Now they may feel they don't have to because They'reic
Schneiderman and Ally is still Attorney General in New York.
But New York law, normally, the way it's written is
quite strict. So we could find out an answer to
your question more quickly than by November fifteenth, twenty eighteen,

(48:25):
if they decide to follow New York.

Speaker 2 (48:27):
Law, and New York shut down the Trump Foundation.

Speaker 4 (48:31):
Exactly for a far smaller set of offenses. So Bill
Clinton was agreed to become honorary chancellor of this thing
called Llourate Education, the company that I think is highly suspicious.
You know, it's it's track record both going private and
the leverage by it, and the going public raising securities.
I don't like the filings. I don't like all the
red flags I see of executives leaving following an IPO.

(48:54):
I don't like the report of financial performance. I don't
like the effects with its under investigation anyway. From some
time in twenty ten, I want to say April May,
for about five years, Bill Clinton collected a total of
seventeen point six million for part time work as honorary chancellor.

Speaker 3 (49:09):
Of a for profit university.

Speaker 4 (49:11):
It stinks on so many levels that conversation is indefensibly high,
not explaining any Clinton Foundation filing as it should be.

Speaker 3 (49:19):
It is what I would call in Norman.

Speaker 4 (49:22):
It's the appropriation of private game by a trustee.

Speaker 3 (49:25):
Bill was a trustee.

Speaker 4 (49:27):
He was chairman of the HIV Eights thing from some
time in two thousand and nine forward, and he was
a trustee of the parent foundation from twenty thirteen forward.
And they haven't disclosed any of this. What they went
after Trump for is there was a Trump's foundation. They
operated something called Trump University. New York is very strict
about using the word university in a name, but they

(49:49):
don't seem to care about the Clinton Global Initiative University,
which was a joint venture with Laureate from two thousand
and I think seven or eight forward, operating here in
New York using that word university, with getting cleared by
our Department of Education in New York, without ever validly
organizing the Clinton Global Initiative properly, without structuring a joint
venture properly, without disclosing Bill Clinton's personal payments properly. You know,

(50:13):
it's an example. I joke about this, and it's a
sad joke. If you want to learn how to run
a foundation properly, just look closely at the Clinton Foundation
record and do exactly the opposite of everything they've done.
Then you'll have a prayer of doing it correct.

Speaker 2 (50:28):
You know, it's amazing when you look at the compensation again,
do they have that much influence to pedal like it
would take twenty four hours a day of phone calls
and fixes and to justify that kind of money they're
making in.

Speaker 4 (50:41):
Well, see, this is part of the larger problem. I
see the real problem here as being we have a
system of unregulated globalism, so you know, people will run around.
I call it the thirteen BlackBerry club. You know Jacques
group that had thirteen BlackBerry similar to Clinton had thirteen blackberries.
You're running around on planes all the time arguing you're
serving the greater global good. You're fighting climate chains and
AIDS and all this stuff. You can't be bothered with

(51:03):
these pitty pitty little American laws. And you know that's
what these people have been doing, and what has happened
in a period of unregulated globalism, with the un with
a WHO, with these world.

Speaker 3 (51:17):
Banks and other things like that.

Speaker 4 (51:20):
You have the ability, as a former leader and an
aspiring leader to unlock lots of subsidized money and grants
so that you know it's nothing to pay a perspective
and give ten million to a foundation if you can
get billions back and subsidized loans, even grants, if you
can get a wireless license or mining deal, or you

(51:40):
can get forbearance by the IRS or some foreign you know,
or Justice Department or some foreign organization. I mean, this
club of former leaders get scratch each other's backs, and
so I think a lot of that's been going on
in the United States. Sadly, it certainly goes on all
across the world. Old in some countries are you know,

(52:01):
in some countries the size of the illegal economy is
as big as the declared economy. You know, so there's
a lot of this. There's a lot of dirty money.
It needs a home. What better way than to disguise
bribery in a false front foundation.

Speaker 2 (52:16):
It's brilliant, It's brilliant. How does Uranium one deal connected
the Clinton Foundation? Does it?

Speaker 3 (52:23):
It does? I think?

Speaker 4 (52:24):
So what happened is that's an example of trading favors.
So it turns out that the Clinton that apparently when
Bill Clinton Will flew to Kazakhstan in two thousand and
five and subsequently when this Uranium One Predators company was created,
the Russians apparently didn't like that. They you know, people
were trying to corner the uranium market, so they began

(52:45):
to mess around. Inside the United States, the FBI began
to investigate that, and it's one of these, if you
remember Mad magazine, Spy versus Spy, It's one of these
very complex matters where, you know, different groups were trying
to spy and gain from cornering the uranium market, and
an investigation was opened up. There's an informant who is
I think already talking to our FBI who alleges personal

(53:08):
knowledge of black bags filled with cash going into the
Clinton Foundation to gain favor through operation of our government,
first through the intercession of Hillary Clinton as a senator
and then later when she was Secretary of State. So
we'll figure all this out. But it's you know, your
old fashioned corrupt Practices Act. You put money into a foundation,

(53:30):
nobody will attack you for that, and then magically the
US government either doesn't prosecute you or gives you a benefit.
And you can't connect the dots because the US government
is a big thing. Hillary's just one cabinet person, but
in reality, there is a connection and this needs to
be put on display. I mean, it's tough out there
in the private sector to comply with the law. We

(53:51):
shouldn't have a system where our government leaders are exempt
from laws profiting from their government service to the level of,
you know, being President United State. It's dead broke and
almost immediately starting to make ten million or more per
year and having two mansions.

Speaker 3 (54:06):
That's just not right.

Speaker 2 (54:08):
Yeah, And it seems like so much money is spread
around on both sides of the aisle in Congress, in
the Senate, in the House, that there's never going to
be honest hearings on these things, because everybody's got their
little toe in the water.

Speaker 3 (54:20):
You know, I don't know about that.

Speaker 4 (54:23):
I think that the executive order that Donald Trumps signed
on the twenty first of December is a good sign.
The moves to put new people into the IRS and
now the senior levels in the IRS Justice Department, I
don't know. I think we have a different sheriff in town.
I'm hopeful that the Trump administration will in fact use

(54:47):
this Clinton Foundation as one way of exposing this type
of fraud. It's interesting to me that he's going. Donald
Trump will be at the World Economic Forum in a
few weeks. How fun would it be for him to
stand up make an example of this.

Speaker 3 (55:02):
I'm not saying I know.

Speaker 4 (55:02):
He's going to do it, but you know, I certainly
would be doing it if I were he to go
and face down the globalists and say, you know, globalism's
fine if the regulations at fite, but it ain't fine
if it's you know, run the way the Clinton Foundation
and Unitated been run.

Speaker 3 (55:17):
That's not acceptable. But we're not going to fund it.

Speaker 2 (55:20):
If you can't get a conviction in this deal, there's
no hope, but we're at a time what do you
want to leave us with? And then how can people
get a hold of you?

Speaker 4 (55:28):
Well, I'm doing a new podcast show with Crowdsource the
Truth on YouTube called Sunday with Charles, and there are
a lot of detailed episodes already up many hours, many
tens of hours up there. So that's one way. And
I'm on Twitter at Charles Ortel and my site you've
mentioned is Charles Rotel dot com. You can contact me
through Twitter or on my site.

Speaker 2 (55:50):
Then thanks for having me on hey, thank you so much.
And next time you know you got something new, just
to shoot me an email. We'll put you right on here.

Speaker 4 (55:57):
Thanks so much, Thanks to you and your team.

Speaker 2 (55:59):
Thank you very much. Get okay, Well they got Charle Tel,
Charles Ortel, Charles Ortel dot com. That's O R T
E L one L. It's easy to find though, great stuff. Hey,
I'm gonna want from a show on a way when

(56:20):
I got off the phone and send that Clinton Foundation
letter I got. We'll be right back after these messages
coming up after this, we have Janita Broadrick, who was
raped by Bill Clinton. So it's kind of a Clinton show,
Clinton themed show today we'll be right back after this
with Wana. And now a word from our sponsors. Archival Revival,

(56:44):
the Christian Film Archive is currently paying for vintage Christian films.
They are dedicated to preserving and restoring classic Christian films
and media. So if you have original prints, negatives, or
other film elements of classic Christian films, or have audio
recording masters for classic Christian record albums, they want to
buy them from you. So email Archival dot Revival at

(57:08):
gmail dot com and they're going to make you an offer.
Archival Revival wants to preserve these classic Christian films so
that they continue saving people for years, these films that
brought people to salvation, they want to continue that. Their
staff has decades of experience in handling and preserving on
film elements, utilize the very best climate control film storage
facilities around the world. Contact them today at Archival dot

(57:32):
Revival at gmail dot com. If there's someone you know
has these prints, negatives, recording masters, or other materials from
vintage Christian films, you can check out their blog at
Archival Revival dot blogspot dot com. Now, just so you understand,
Archival Revival wants to pay you for these films. So
you can look in your church attic in the church basement.

(57:53):
If you have a friend who runs a Christian youth ministry,
these vacation Bible study camp they have these old films
and those big metal containers sixteen milimeter and thirty five
milimeter Arkylal Revival wants to buy them from you. So
this is a sponsor that actually wants to give you money.
And all you have to do is contact them, tell
them what you have if you're in the UK, or
Island or Africa with these films are all over the

(58:16):
world and they're gathering dust and they're going to deteriorate
if they don't get into the hands of Archival Revival.
So that's Archival dot Revival at gmail dot com, or
the blog spot is Archival Revival dot blogspot dot com.

Speaker 3 (58:32):
Don't forget.

Speaker 2 (58:33):
This show is brought to you by pscoco dot com.
Phoebe Side is an independent curator with the Cocoa Exchange.
The Coco Exchange is formerly known as Dove Chocolate Discoveries,
and they make the finest, silky smooth chocolate because the
products start with the best cocoa beans, which are tested
for quality and flavor by expert technicians. The Cocoa Exchange

(58:53):
offers not just premium chocolates, but anything from sauces and
spices to brownieancake mixes and even coffee and more its mixes.
If you wish to treat yourself or someone you love
to a sweet and tasty gift, then the Coco Exchange
is the brand for you. So you go to pscoco
dot com. You click on the shop now button. You
can see all their beautiful chocolates. You can order it
right now tonight. It could be in your mailbox in

(59:15):
a couple of days. Or if you want to get
into the chocolate business, you want to be a chocolate
tier just like Phoebe Sod, click the contact us button
and you can learn how to get your own website,
go into the Coco chocolate business and sell chocolate and
make a little bit of money there. Remember all these
shows on a wake are brought to you by email
revealer dot com. You can go to email revealer dot
com and get a copy of my book how to

(59:36):
Become a Successful Private Investigator. But you also do all
the kind of different services for you at an online
and dating service. Investigations called an online infidelity investigation and
that's where you give us your husband or your boyfriend
your girlfriend's email address, and we trace it back to
their online dating websites, and we return a list of
all the dating sites that email is registered to. We
can expand our night investigation and trace it back to

(59:56):
porn sites, esports service sites, swinger sites, gambling websites, and
even prescription drug websites. If you think your ex husband
or something is addicted to prescription medication or involved in
an extreme online pornography addiction, but we can produce a
report for you can use in court adoption investigations. If
you want to locate your birth parents so you or
your birth child he gave way for adoption. We can

(01:00:17):
do adoption investigations for you. Asset searches for you locate
bank accounts, hidden assets, hidden properties, hidden income, all different
kinds of services in the asset search investigation. Email tracing.
If you need to locate or identify somebody from just
an email address, we can do an email trace investigation
for you. In all kinds of digital forensics, computer and
cell phone digital forensics, where we can recover deleted content

(01:00:40):
from an email or a hard drive and produce a
report for you that you can use in court. That's
email revealer dot com. Or you can contact me at
Oppermaninvestigations at gmail dot com.