Hillary’s Emails and Clinton Cash: the Scandals Come Together

[Valin]

Power Line:

John Hinderaker

August 24, 2016

 

If you feel that you are hopelessly behind on the news regarding Hillary Clinton’s many breaches of security through her home-brew server as well as the Clinton Cash pay-to-play scandal, in which Hillary more or less auctioned off the State Department, Glenn Reynolds’ latest USA Today column is a good way to catch up.

 

 

 

Back in July, Democratic presidential nominee and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “there is absolutely no connection between anything that I did as secretary of state and the Clinton Foundation.”

 

As we all know now, that was a bald-faced lie.

 

 

 

On Monday of this week, ABC’s Liz Kreutzer reminded people of that statement, as a new batch of emails reveal that there was a connection, and it was cash. As the emails, recovered by the public-interest law firm Judicial Watch, demonstrate, people who made donations to the Clinton Foundation got preferential treatment, and access, at the State Department when Hillary was Secretary of State.

 

We have written about this several times. It is a miracle that Hillary didn’t sell the State Department’s official seal.

 

(Snip)

[Geee]

Ethicists scoff at Clinton Foundation transition plan

 

The Clinton Foundation’s vague timetable to limit its involvement with overseas programs, and its insistence that Chelsea Clinton remain on its board, raise red flags for ethics watchdogs even as the charity vows to avoid conflicts of interest in a Hillary Clinton presidency.

 

Foundation President Donna Shalala suggested Tuesday that reorganizing the $2 billion enterprise could not happen overnight. The charity pledged last week not to accept foreign or corporate donations if Clinton is elected.

 

“This kind of unraveling has to be done with a scalpel so that we just do not hurt people, and do not interrupt the very good work that's being done," Shalala said in an interview with NPR.

But Richard Painter, former ethics counsel in the George W. Bush administration, said that if the Clintons really wanted to separate themselves, they could do it tomorrow.

“That could be done in one board meeting — change the name, have the board members resign and be replaced with people with no ties to the Clintons. No one in the Clinton family should be there. ... That’s an easy step to take. It could be done in an afternoon,” Painter said.

Independent trustees with experience at other charities could oversee any necessary changes without jeopardizing programs, he said.

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/clinton-foundation-transition-plan-227386

[Valin]

Ethicists scoff at Clinton Foundation transition plan

 

The Clinton Foundation’s vague timetable to limit its involvement with overseas programs, and its insistence that Chelsea Clinton remain on its board, raise red flags for ethics watchdogs even as the charity vows to avoid conflicts of interest in a Hillary Clinton presidency.

 

Foundation President Donna Shalala suggested Tuesday that reorganizing the $2 billion enterprise could not happen overnight. The charity pledged last week not to accept foreign or corporate donations if Clinton is elected.

 

 

 

Something I recall reading in Dec 07 Jan. 08 (?) , A lot of Democrats were supporting Obama over Hillary because they were tired of dealing with all the Clinton baggage. It would not surprise me in the least if there were (high level) Democrats who were hoping Hillary loses, just so they don't have to put up with the Clinton's anymore. They won't come out and say it....but....