Madame BleachBit's own daughter didn't like the way things smelled at the Foundation

Were you aware of this?

Chelsea Clinton’s bold decision in 2011 to launch an “internal investigation” into the finances of the Clinton Foundation and Clinton Global Initiative was the equivalent of a declaration of war by the first daughter and a bombshell about the financial mess she discovered at the foundation.

The latest revelation came out Tuesday in a new batch of WikiLeaks emails sent to and from Clinton confidant John Podesta, who now is Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign chairman.

Two emails — one dated Nov. 12, 2011 and another dated Jan. 4, 2012 — show Chelsea was aggressively looking into the foundation’s money flows and talking to others about it.

Her actions worried President Bill Clinton’s long-time handler Doug Band, who complained to Podesta about Chelsea’s intervention into the internal operations of the foundation.

The disclosure suggests that Chelsea was shocked by what she found inside her parent’s organization that secured millions of dollars from despots, Eastern European tycoons, Arab Sheiks and foreign billionaires — all of whom also were seeking favors from her mom and dad.

In the 2011 email, Band complained to Podesta about Chelsea’s activity within the foundation, accusing her efforts to reform the organization as the behavior of  a “spoiled brat.”

But in his January 2012 email Band discloses that Chelsea, “is conducting an internal investigation of money within the foundation from cgi to the foundation.”

“CGI” is the Clinton Global Initiative where the Clintons annually assemble the world’s richest people and connect them to U.S. and foreign government officials.

And now we have access to the investigation's findings:

An independent “governance review” conducted by a prominent law firm that specializes in philanthropic issues concluded in December 2010 that the Clinton Foundation had a weak, rubber stamp board of directors and that many of its donors had “an expectation of a quid pro quo benefits in return for gifts.”

The blistering review — made public Thursday by WikiLeaks — described a tax-exempt public foundation with none of the independent oversight required under federal charity law. The Clinton Foundation reported $187 million in net assets in 2011.

The investigation was carried out by a crack team:

The review was conducted by the New York law firm of Simpson Thacher and was requested by Chelsea Clinton who had profound misgivings about the operation of her parent’s foundation. Leading the review was Victoria Bjorklund, one of the nation’s top-ranked legal experts on good-governance practices for foundations and charities. She came out of retirement to lead the review.

Chelsea's been rather low-profile throughout this campaign, not much more than an occasional speech. What methods are being employed to keep her that way?