As Donald Trump gears up for his all-out war on Hillary and Bill Clinton, the presumptive Republican nominee on Wednesday is planning to draw ammunition from the controversies that have dogged the family, and particularly its Clinton Foundation, for years.

"I will be making a big speech tomorrow to discuss the failed policies and bad judgment of Crooked Hillary Clinton," Trump tweeted Tuesday, teasing out an address scheduled for Trump SoHo in New York, a day after Clinton laced into his economic and business acumen.


Trump initially planned to deliver a speech, originally scheduled for June 13 in New Hampshire, "discussing all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons." But after the Orlando attack, Trump instead refocused that address on national security.

Now, he'll be back on the attack — helped by four decades' worth of statements, association, innuendo and scandal. And the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, which has been embroiled in political controversy from its inception in 1997, is going to be at the top of Trump's target list.

Before Clinton even formally announced her campaign last spring, conservative author Peter Schweizer was writing "Clinton Cash," digging into the foundation's financial dealings and connections. Less than a month into her run, questions resurfaced about a series of issues related to the foundation, from troublesome tax returns to myriad donations from countries with less than stellar human rights records. And while the media frenzy has subsided somewhat in 2016, Trump's early line of attack suggests that the organization Bill Clinton describes as one that has "done a lot of good things" is about to be dragged back into a turbulent political season.

In a sneak preview of the coming battle royale, Trump declared that "Hillary Clinton turned the State Department into her private hedge fund," during a speech June 7 at his Westchester County golf club. On Tuesday, Trump's rapid-response effort kicked into high gear, firing off multiple tweets, posts and emails seeking to undercut Clinton's argument that he would be disastrous for the economy while promoting his own policies. And he accused the former first couple of "laundering" money and making "hundreds of millions of dollars selling access, selling favors, selling government contracts."

There's sure to be more. Here is a pocket guide to where Trump might attack:

Tuesday's warning

As Clinton finished up her speech laying into Trump's economic policies, the Republican's burgeoning rapid-response unit sent forth an avalanche of emails, tweets and social media posts critiquing both the candidate and former president for a series of misdeeds, ranging from instances of alleged personal impropriety to broad responsibility for the state of the American economy.

In the first of nine emails sent out directly before, during and minutes after the former secretary of state spoke to supporters in Columbus, Ohio, Trump's campaign pointed out that Mark Zandi, an economist who Clinton pointed out in her address advised Sen. John McCain, had donated to the Democratic candidate and had his policies praised by the current administration.

Another email sought to link Tuesday's news that Boeing had reached an agreement with Iran's largest airline as a consequence of the Iranian nuclear deal, stating, "Iran, the world’s largest state sponsor of terror, would not have been allowed to enter into these negotiations with Boeing without Clinton’s disastrous Iran Nuclear Deal."

Trump's campaign later attacked Clinton's "lack of poise under pressure" in response to her argument that he lacks the proper temperament to be president, referring to a forthcoming book by a former Secret Service agent who wrote that what he "saw in the 1990s sickened me."

A later email alleged that as secretary of state, Clinton "laundered money" to her husband through Laureate Education while he was still an honorary chairman for the educational for-profit organization.

The White House ethics agreement

Foundation officials disclosed in February 2015 that one donation made during Clinton’s time at Foggy Bottom violated the ethics agreement the foundation had signed with the Obama administration.

The agreement was reached in 2008, before Clinton was nominated as secretary of state, as the incoming White House expressed concern about countries using the foundation to leverage political favor from the State Department. The memo did not ban donations from foreign countries with a stake in U.S. interests, with one exception. The agreement blocked donations to the Clinton Global Initiative, which hosts the fancy annual Clinton Foundation event starring the former president and other world leaders.

In the one instance acknowledged as a violation more than a year ago, foundation officials said they should have submitted a $500,000 donation in 2010 from the Algerian government for its Haiti earthquake relief fund to the State Department for approval.

“This donation was disclosed publicly on the Clinton Foundation website, however, the State Department should have also been formally informed. This was a one-time, specific donation to help Haiti and Algeria had not donated to the Clinton Foundation before and has not since,” a spokesman told POLITICO at the time.

Should Clinton be elected president, "[t]here'll clearly be some changes in what the Clinton Foundation does and how we do it, and we'll just have to cross that bridge when we come to it," Bill Clinton told Bloomberg TV on June 14, echoing what the campaign has said.

The donations that ‘slipped through the cracks’

The day after Trump promised to unleash on the foundation, Clinton and her surrogates began a two-day media blitz. During the first day of that press tour, they answered multiple questions about disclosure surrounding their donors, remarking that the organization went above and beyond requirements in an effort to be transparent.

"We had absolutely overwhelming disclosure,” she told CNN's Anderson Cooper. “Were there, you know, one or two instances that slipped through the cracks? Yes. But was the overwhelming amount of anything that anybody gave the foundation disclosed? Absolutely.”

The time a donor got on a sensitive intelligence board

Rajiv K. Fernando, a Democratic donor and Chicago securities trader who contributed to the Clinton Foundation, was placed on the International Security Advisory Board in 2011 despite lacking the qualifications of his colleagues. “We had no idea who he was,” one board member said, according to a June 10 ABC News report. ABC's report detailed emails its journalists obtained from Citizens United through the Freedom of Information Act.

“The emails further reveal how, after inquiries from ABC News, the Clinton staff sought to ‘protect the name’ of the Secretary, ‘stall’ the ABC News reporter and ultimately accept the resignation of the donor just two days later,” ABC reported.

The emails provided to ABC, according to the report, showed a State Department official unable to immediately answer why Fernando was on the panel.

“The true answer is simply that S staff (Cheryl Mills) added him,” Wade Boese, who was chief of staff for the Office of the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, wrote in an email to press aide Jamie Mannina, according to ABC’s report. “Raj was not on the list sent to S [secretary of state]; he was added at their insistence.”

Emails released by the State Department as part of the court-ordered schedule do not explicitly show Clinton being involved in Fernando’s placement. In one email from 2010 provided to ABC with the subject line “ISAB,” shorthand for the organization, chief of staff Mills wrote, “The secretary had two other names she wanted looked at.”

The case of the errant tax returns

As part of the renewed scrutiny on the Clinton Foundation in the spring of 2015, Reuters reported in April that a review showed errors in how it reported donations from foreign governments on its forms 990 from 2010 through 2012.

The Clinton Foundation in November filed three years of revised tax returns with the Internal Revenue Service.

"Although the exhaustive review found several additional errors, our external tax reviewers informed us that the errors did not require us to amend our returns; There is no change in our bottom line numbers: assets, liabilities, and net assets; and we do not owe any taxes," Clinton Foundation CEO Donna Shalala said in a statement at the time. "Our reviewers advised us the Foundation has no legal obligation to file amended returns, but that if we did file an amended return it would be important for us to correct errors found in the review."

The speaking fees, part I

Also on the heels of Schweizer’s book came a report from ABC News in April 2015 that Bill Clinton’s speaking fees had begun to double or triple after Hillary Clinton became secretary of state.

The report noted that the former president, who usually pulled down $150,000 per speech after leaving the White House, was paid $500,000 by a Russian investment bank and $750,000 to address a telecom conference in China.

At a time when Bernie Sanders was pushing Clinton on her paid speeches to Goldman Sachs, a CNN analysis in February found that the Clintons earned more than $153 million combined in 729 separate paid speeches from February 2001 until May 2015.

The speaking fees, part II

The same week other outlets were reporting on Schweizer’s findings, The Washington Post’s Rosalind Helderman reported that Bill Clinton took in at least $26 million to speak to organizations that have also donated to the foundation.

“It’s not surprising that organizations who believe strongly in the Clinton Foundation’s mission and are impressed by its results are genuinely interested in President Clinton’s perspective,” Clinton Foundation spokesman Craig Minassian told the Post at the time. “The president often says the foundation is his life today, and he welcomes any opportunity to educate people about it and encourage more people to work together to solve some of the most critical global challenges we all face.”

In its analysis, the Post reported that among the approximately 420 organizations that paid Clinton to speak from 2001 to 2013, 67 of them also donated at least $10,000 each to the charity.

The Russian uranium deal

As secretary of state, Clinton sat on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S., which had before it a request to approve the sale of U.S. uranium stock to Russian atomic energy agency Rosatom as part of a transitioned takeover of a company which through an earlier merger had acquired U.S. uranium interests. The agreement was also reviewed by several other agencies, including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Following on Schweizer’s research, The New York Times reported in April 2015 that Canadian businessman Frank Giustra had acquired uranium interests during a 2005 trip to Kazakhstan with Bill Clinton. Giustra, whose up-and-coming UrAsia merged with the South African company Uranium One in 2007, gave more than $31 million to the foundation in 2006 and pledged $100 million more.

Rosatom took over 17 percent of Uranium One in 2009, increasing to 51 percent in 2010 and the rest of the company in 2013. Ian Telfer, who chaired Uranium One at the time of its acquisition by Rosatom, donated $2.35 million in four separate gifts through his family foundation.

"Whether the donations played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown," the Times reported in the article. "But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors."

The UBS deal

The Wall Street Journal reported last July that Hillary Clinton intervened on behalf of Swiss banking giant UBS AG, which the IRS was suing to get the identities of Americans with offshore accounts.

After that intervention in 2009, donations by UBS to the Clinton Foundation increased from less than $60,000 to a total of $600,000 by the end of 2014, according to the Journal’s report. Additionally, the bank lent $32 million to the foundation to jump-start its entrepreneurship and inner-city loan program, and Bill Clinton received $1.5 million to do question-and-answer sessions with UBS Wealth Management Chief Executive Bob McCann.

However, the Journal’s report acknowledges that there is “no evidence of any link between Mrs. Clinton’s involvement in the case and the bank’s donations to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, or its hiring of Mr. Clinton,” while characterizing it as a “prime example of how the Clintons’ private and political activities overlap.”

“Any suggestion that she was driven by anything but what’s in America’s best interest would be false. Period,” a Clinton campaign spokesman told the Journal at the time.

The foreign donations

After Clinton left office in 2013, the foundation lifted its ban on donations from foreign governments. The Wall Street Journal reported in February 2015 that recent donors to the foundation included the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Australia, Germany and a Canadian government agency seeking the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline.

As recently as this month, Sanders seized upon the foreign donations in questioning in the judgment of Clinton to be commander in chief.

"If you ask me about the Clinton Foundation, do I have a problem when a sitting secretary of state and a foundation run by her husband collects many millions of dollars from foreign governments, many governments which are dictatorships … yeah, I do," Sanders told CNN's Jake Tapper in an interview aired June 5.

Asked whether the foundation's ongoing activities presented an ongoing conflict of interest, Sanders responded, "Yes, I do."

Trump himself has openly boasted that Sanders' lines about Clinton's paid speeches would be useful fodder in a general election bout, even as the Vermont senator has vowed to do everything in his power to keep the presumptive Republican nominee from the White House.

Five days before Clinton declared victory in the Democratic primary, Trump tweeted, "Bernie Sanders was right when he said that Crooked Hillary Clinton was not qualified to be president because she suffers from BAD judgement!"

On Tuesday, the Trump campaign said the foundation had accepted between approximately $21.3 million and $65.5 million from the governments of countries with "policies hostile toward women's rights, gay rights and human rights," including Algeria, Brunei, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, the Friends of Saudi Arabia organization and the Zayeds, the ruling family of the Emirates.

Promoting his "major speech," Trump told supporters on the night of the final Republican primaries, "I think you’re going to find it very informative and very, very interesting. I wonder if the press will want to attend. Who knows?"

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story misstated that Hillary Clinton sat on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as secretary of state; she was a member of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.