For years, insider trading was legal for members of Congress, but that doesn’t mean it was the right thing to do. In their decades in public life, they have played fast and loose with rules and norms that inhibit others, always winding up just a smidgen short of illegality.
Advertisement
Oh wait, they already do.
“If the donors care about the programs, they’ll keep writing the checks”. That’s how they get their money. Still, the unusual structure remains confusing for some, something that can be compounded by both Hillary Clinton’s political activity and who’s donating to the foundation itself.
While the AP found no direct evidence of a quid pro quo, the correlation between meetings and donations certainly raises the possibility of a pay-to-play culture at the Clinton State Department. So, his money for a meeting with the Clintons. There’s too little signal and too much noise.
Hillary Clinton was reckless with national security secrets when she was secretary of state and has been utterly shameless when it comes to telling the truth.
Hillary Clinton’s defenders say the Clinton Foundation does tremendous, life-saving work – and they’re right.
An investigative report from the Associated Press found at least 85 of 154 people from private interests who had either face-to-face meetings or telephone conversations with Clinton during her tenure at the State Department donated money directly to the Clinton Foundation or pledged support for its global programs. The AP said it focused on her meetings with outsiders because those were more discretionary, as Clinton would normally meet with federal officials and foreign officials as part of her job.
If Trump could prove that, he would.
Did corporations and foreign governments make donations to the Clinton Foundation as a way of cozying up to Hillary Clinton? They heaped scorn on the chief example cited by the AP of a donor Clinton met: Muhammad Yunus, who happens to be the Nobel Prize-winning father of microfinance, and whom she’s known for decades. “She sold favors and access in exchange for cash”. She said it excluded 2,000 meetings she had held with world leaders and USA government officials and came to the conclusion that meetings she held with philanthropists like Melinda Gates or Nobel Prize victor Muhammad Yunus was connected to the foundation. There is no way even a journalism school valedictorian could credibly argue that the Clinton Foundation graft didn’t directly involve the public interest. To believe this Clinton Foundation “corruption” angle, you don’t just have to believe that Hillary Clinton is venally corrupt, you also have to believe that she’s a cheap date and incredibly dumb.
But Clinton-haters aren’t the only ones who can distort facts.
Clinton noted that the Clinton Foundation does “life-saving work” and is “well-respected” in the US and around the world. She said the foundation had provided “life-saving work”, adding that neither she nor her husband had ever drawn a salary from the charity. If the connection to the Clinton Foundation is wrong for Ms. Clinton as president, why was it alright for her as secretary of State? “I made policy decisions based on what I thought was right – to keep Americans safe and protect US interests overseas”.
Advertisement
Carroll’s more fundamental problem seems to be her belief in a false distinction between “reporting” and social media. Foundation should “probably” shutter if Clinton wins Senate Dems” campaign arm knocks GOP for Trump support GOP chairmen subpoena tech firms tied to Clinton’s email server MORE (R-Wis.), reportedly signaled that the Clinton Foundation should go further than Bill ClintonBill ClintonDem Senate candidate: Foundation should “probably’ shutter if Clinton wins Will the United States and Canada start a trade war over lumber? The sheer stupidity of the Republican primary electorate’s decision and of the reaction of party leadership, which could have blocked or dumped him, is more maddening than even Hillary Clinton’s shadiness.
